The Chemtrail Phenomenon

Hi, wonderworld.

Originally posted by wonderworld
I know there are many different trails, Distrails, Vapor trails, Contrails and Chemtrails and more.

My idea on the subject is to not complicate things.
For me there are 3 #####trails types.

1 = ) CONtrails, short and long ones, existing since between WW I & II,
since planes fly HIGH enough. Water vapor condensing when colder.
Fuel +-chemistry: C + O = CO and H + H + O = guess what? H2O

2 = ) SMOKEtrails, in airSHOWs. We repeat: Airshows, for pleasure !

3= ) Our CHEMtrails, secret, NOT including cloud-seeding-weather-control,
and not including the global-warming-control lies, and other lies.
For now, we can't say what they are or what's in them? it's a SECRET !
( See a previous message of mine, on this ).

So, does it "fit" your ideas ? B-)

Blue skies.

reply to post by C-JEAN


What about contrails from ships?

What category does that fall into?

reply to post by Chadwickus


It's not that I'm not interested but never researched Ship contrails. I'm only interested in Chemtrails and some flying Contrails.

I may check out that interesting link later. It does seem intriguing, especially from a satellite view.

reply to post by C-JEAN


Yes, keeping it simple is the way to go; although this can get fairly scientific at times.

A closer look at the X symbol.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by wonderworld]

reply to post by wonderworld


Well it seems you clearly don't want to actually learn about it then do you?

Your mind is already made up so bugger anyone else who says differently?

Maybe you're better off going to a pro-chemtrail forum to post your pictures where everyone will pat you on the back for being so open minded.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by wonderworld

 

Maybe you're better off going to a pro-chemtrail forum to post your pictures where everyone will pat you on the back for being so open minded.

Is this officially an anti-chemtrail forum?

I didn't think that ATS is Pro or Con, just a venue for open exploration.

Am I misunderstanding?

reply to post by Chadwickus


My exact words on the second line were;

I may check out that interesting link later. It does seem intriguing, especially from a satellite view.

I'll never be closed minded, I hope.

P.S I'm off to take a look at your ship site. I just didnt want to take on too much at once.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by wonderworld]

reply to post by interestedalways


Thank you and I'm off to check out his ship contrails to see what's up with that.

We cant please all the people all the time I guess.

reply to post by interestedalways


Most definitely an open forum.

The comment was said in sarcasm.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by interestedalways

 

Most definitely an open forum.

The comment was said in sarcasm.

That's cool.

Sorry I have been picking a bit...........

reply to post by wonderworld


Fair enough, but to understand chemtails/contrails, you need to understand many different aspects that may seem totally unrelated.

For example, the argument about contrails dissipating after a few minutes is false.

Or that contrails only form high above the ground, another falsity, that's why I linked to the ship trails.

The last thing I wanna throw at you is the claim of chemtrails poisoning us. Now I've already mentioned how people should be able to easily test and record such a thing but here's another angle for you, which ties in with what I was just saying:

Manufacturing Industry - The REAL Chem Trail

Sorry if it's information overload but there is a whole lot more to it than just pictures 'm sorry to say.

Propaganda has been around for a long time.

Some say spraying is to help fight West Nile Virus and mosquitoes. This would in fact spray healthy humans.

Some say are that the spraying is to control the weather more propaganda as this is not seeding any clouds.

We should also take a look at the Manhattan Project. The 994-document that has come out of the study is entitled:

'Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base - Panel on Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming.' The document can be read online in its entirety at:

books.nap.edu... .

Why is there no main stream media reports? Take a good guess!

[edit on 31-5-2009 by wonderworld]

reply to post by Chadwickus


Just noticed something in the video you posted at a minute and 3 seconds he reads the report but he reads it wrong take a look.

The actual video clearly shows 68.8 ug/L (stands for MICROGRAMS PER LITER), eg 68.8 ppb (STANDS FOR PARTS PER BILLION). A Liter of water is 1000 grams, or 1 kilogram. Just as 1+1=2, so does a millionth of a gram out of one thousand grams correspond to one part per Billion. And so does 68.8 millionths of a gram per liter correspond to 68.8 parts per BILLION.

The reporter was not off by a factor of 1000, but only 100 instead, but only because he read the "68.8" as "6.8". So Ferrell only over-estimated the amount of barium in the test report by a factor of 100 (or, 10,000 PER CENT if you prefer percentages).

Isnt math fun

Proof the government is fooling around with Chemicals in our atmosphere.

Many facets of the earth's climatic system are poorly understood. A significant uncertainty associated with the modeling of future climatic changes is due to deficiencies in the understanding of, and in the incorporation into the climate models of, several interactive climate feedback mechanisms. In this discussion of radiative forcing, the planet's heat balance, and these feedbacks and their consequences, emphasis is given to global mean quantities, since, conventionally, the concept of radiative feedback mechanisms is applied to global mean quantities associated with changes from one equilibrium climate to another. Many aspects of these feedback mechanisms are controversial. The conventional wisdom has been challenged on several pointsTo date, most emphasis has been placed on the development and testing of atmospheric models. Even though policymakers' would like them, current capabilities do not allow credible projections of regional effects. The panel finds that these and other aspects of climate models have even greater uncertainty than those associated with global mean temperature projections. However, for purposes of assessing their limits for policy decisions, the primary focus of the examination here is on global mean temperature. Considerable effort has been focused on atmospheric GCM experiments in which the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere is instantaneously doubled and the models are then allowed to achieve a new equilibrium climate. Although these simulations do not provide information on time-dependent (or "transient") climatic changes that would accompany more realistic greenhouse gas. For present purposes the only simulations considered are those that utilize computed clouds; i.e., that incorporate cloud feedback. accumulation scenarios, they do allow a means of testing, understanding, and comparing atmospheric GCMs. books.nap.edu...

I found this at the U.S.Patent online site.

PATENT - NASA BARIUM ION CLOUD US3813875: ROCKET HAVING BARIUM RELEASE SYSTEM TO CREATE ION

CLOUDS IN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE Abstract: A chemical system for releasing a good yield of free barium (Ba�) atoms and barium ions (BA+) to create ion clouds in the upper atmosphere and interplanetary space for the study of the geophysical properties of the medium. Inventor(s): Paine; Thomas O. Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with respect to an invention of , Hampton, VA 23364 Issued/Filed Dates: June 4, 1974 / April 28, 1972 Application Number: US1972000248761 CLAIMS



Welsbach Patent:
US5003186: "Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming"

Inventor(s): Chang; David B. , Tustin, CA Shih; I-Fu , Los Alamitos, CA

Applicant(s): Hughes Aircraft Company, Los Angeles, CA News, Profiles, Stocks and More about this company

Issued/Filed Dates: March 26, 1991 / April 23, 1990

Welsbach Patent - Hughes Aircraft In 1994, the Hughes aerospace company was issued a remarkable patent. The Welsbach patent "for Reduction of Global Warming" proposed countering global warming by dispensing microscopic particles of aluminum oxide and other reflective materials into the upper atmosphere. This "sky shield" would reflect one or two percent of incoming sunlight. The patent suggested that tiny metal flakes could be "added to the fuel of jet airliners, so that the particles would be emitted from the jet engine exhaust while the airliner was at its cruising altitude."

Application Number: US1990000513145

IPC Class: G21K 1/00;

Class: Current: 250/505.1; 244/158.R; 250/503.1; 250/504.R; Original: 250/505.1; 250/504.R; 250/503.1; 244/158.R;

Field of Search: 250/505.1,504 R,503.1,493.1 244/136,158 R

Abstract: : A method is described for reducing atmospheric or global warming resulting from the presence of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere, i.e., from the greenhouse effect. Such gases are relatively transparent to sunshine, but absorb strongly the long-wavelength infrared radiation released by the earth. The method incudes the step of seeding the layer of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere with particles of materials characterized by wavelength-dependent emissivity. Such materials include Welsbach materials and the oxides of metals which have high emissivity (and thus low reflectivities) in the visible and 8-12 micron infrared wavelength regions.

Attorney, Agent, or Firm: Sales; Michael W.; Denson-Low; Wanda; Primary/Assistant Examiners: Berman; Jack I.;

U.S. References: Show the 2 patents that reference this one Patent Issued Inventor(s) Applicant(s) Title US3222675* 12 /1965 Schwartz US4755673 7 /1988 Pollack et al. Hughes Aircraft Company Selective thermal radiators * some details unavailable

First Claim: Show all 18 claims What is claimed is: 1. A method of reducing atmospheric warming due to the greenhouse effect resulting from a layer of gases in the atmosphere which absorb strongly near infrared wavelength radiation, comprising the step of dispersing tiny particles of a material within the gases' layer, the particle material characterized by wavelength-dependent emissivity or reflectivity, in that said material has high emissivities with respect to radiation in the visible and far infrared wavelength spectra, and low emissivity in the near infrared wavelength spectrum, whereby said tiny particles provide a means for converting infrared heat energy into far infrared radiation which is radiated into space.

Spraying has been done many, many times before and Will continue unless
"They" are stoped by its victims.

Here is just a miute sample of what "They" are capable of.
Don't let anyone tell you different.


www.guardian.co.uk...

Millions were in germ war tests
Much of Britain was exposed to bacteria sprayed in secret trials
Antony Barnett, public affairs editor
Observer
Sunday April 21, 2002
The Ministry of Defence turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public.
A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain's biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.
Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.
While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.
The report reveals that military personnel were briefed to tell any 'inquisitive inquirer' the trials were part of research projects into weather and air pollution.
The tests, carried out by government scientists at Porton Down, were designed to help the MoD assess Britain's vulnerability if the Russians were to have released clouds of deadly germs over the country.
In most cases, the trials did not use biological weapons but alternatives which scientists believed would mimic germ warfare and which the MoD claimed were harmless. But families in certain areas of the country who have children with birth defects are demanding a public inquiry.
One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population. The chemical drifted miles inland, its fluorescence allowing the spread to be monitored. In another trial using zinc cadmium sulphide, a generator was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset where it spewed the chemical for an hour.
While the Government has insisted the chemical is safe, cadmium is recognised as a cause of lung cancer and during the Second World War was considered by the Allies as a chemical weapon.
In another chapter, 'Large Area Coverage Trials', the MoD describes how between 1961 and 1968 more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii , which mimics anthrax. These releases came from a military ship, the Icewhale, anchored off the Dorset coast, which sprayed the micro-organisms in a five to 10-mile radius.
The report also reveals details of the DICE trials in south Dorset between 1971 and 1975. These involved US and UK military scientists spraying into the air massive quantities of serratia marcescens bacteria, with an anthrax simulant and phenol.
Similar bacteria were released in 'The Sabotage Trials' between 1952 and 1964. These were tests to determine the vulnerability of large government buildings and public transport to attack. In 1956 bacteria were released on the London Underground at lunchtime along the Northern Line between Colliers Wood and Tooting Broadway. The results show that the organism dispersed about 10 miles. Similar tests were conducted in tunnels running under government buildings in Whitehall.
Experiments conducted between 1964 and 1973 involved attaching germs to the threads of spiders' webs in boxes to test how the germs would survive in different environments. These tests were carried out in a dozen locations across the country, including London's West End, Southampton and Swindon. The report also gives details of more than a dozen smaller field trials between 1968 and 1977

www.guardian.co.uk...

Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by interestedalways

 

Thank you and I'm off to check out his ship contrails to see what's up with that.

These might be of interest to you:

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...

visibleearth.nasa.gov...

cimss.ssec.wisc.edu...

www.coas.oregonstate.edu...

Wouldn't the 'substance' in these chemtrails simply foul up the engine and crash the planes?