Chemtrails and Weather Warfare Validated by History Channel

reply to post by Maxmars


So I got all excited and broke out the pink chablis for nothing?? AHH.

My chemtrail thread has a bit more info on chemtrail warfare but I'm still in favor of this History channel video.

I'm still celebrating.

reply to post by wonderworld

...broke out the pink chablis for nothing...

Do not despair...finish that sweet girly stuff before it goes bad, and then invest in some Veuve Clicquot for next time!



[edit on 24 July 2009 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by Phage

 

So what you are saying you believe in chemtrails but the history channel is all bunk?

No I don't believe in "chemtrails". Thus the quotation marks.

The History Channel is not all bunk, some of what they present is factual, very much of it is nothing more than speculation presented as factual. They are in the business of entertainment. They have little interest in presenting a balanced story. They exercise little discretion in whom they select as experts on a subject or in what they present or insinuate is factual. They, like all programs with this format, are very selective about the sound bites they use.


[edit on 7/24/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by weedwhacker


while I don't disagree with the science behind what causes these glowing clouds, I do believe that chemtrails play a role in the increasing number of occurances and sightings of these types of clouds.

Check this articles out from Wired Science

History Channel will be rebroadcasting this again the 25th , at 3:00 pm central.

reply to post by holywar

Noctilucent clouds occur at altitudes of 50 miles. That's more than 250,000 feet. That's the edge of space. No aircraft can fly that high.

reply to post by Phage


Yes the History channel is for entertainment based on historical data. Chemtrails arent that old and easy to define.

I need to repost this from my chemtrail thread; although you wont buy it.

OBAMA CONSIDERS CHEMTRAILS

President Obama is full of surprises. But even expectant reporters were taken aback when White House science adviser John Holdren used his first interview on April 18, 2009 to announce, “Global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.”

With the first feedback effects from methane releases starting to kick in and our space colony's atmospheric CO2 levels surging toward the “Do Not Exceed” redline of 440 parts per million, Holdren declared that the Obama administration is considering “last resort” technologies to chill the global greenhouse village - aka the 'hood.

Is the Obama administration about to “out” chemtrails?

Referring to “radical” technologies that include spreading a sunlight-reflecting artificial cloud cover, Holdren declared, “It's got to be looked at. We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table.”
Invoking the image of a souped-up sedan careening toward an abyss in a fog of mass marketing exhortations for more speed, the White House science adviser suggested that reasonable passengers would stop arguing if there really was a cliff, how close and how big the drop long enough to urge applying some brakes - while chanting “Our lifestyle is sacred!” and keeping the carbon accelerator jammed to the floorboards.

There is too much to list but you can read the link below.

www.willthomasonline.net...

reply to post by weedwhacker


Hmmmm.

Well once someone does convince you I'll be the first to invite you over for some of your favorite Veuve Clicquot.

P.S I have my own bar in my attic the picture is in my folder so I wont attach a link like you did. Nice touch though!

[edit on 24-7-2009 by wonderworld]

reply to post by wonderworld

Like you said, there is too much to list. Particularly at Thomas' site.

There are studies going way back about the effects of contrails on climate. The general consensus is that contrails probably do have an effect but what that effect is, is very difficult to determine. There also are various patents for various ways of distributing various things at various levels of the atmosphere in order to "mitigate" global warming.

The studies make sense. The more we can learn about things that may affect our climate the better we can learn about what to expect in the future. The patents are nothing more than attempts to claim the commercial rights should anyone ever attempt to take active measures. There are thousands of patents for things that don't work.

The games of politics require that politicians address the concerns of the times whether or not those concerns are valid. Since global warming is of a certain amount of interest right now it is not surprising that our government is talking about it and talking about things that may be done about it. Talk is cheap. That's the good thing about it, it's easy to talk.

First, to actually implement the things mentioned requires a huge amount of resources, something that is in tight supply right now. Second, if you actually look at every paper published about using artificial means of climate control (as opposed to weather control) you will find that they are loaded with caveats about the unknown consequences of such measures. Putting the two together, it becomes clear that there is virtually no chance that such measures are being undertaken now or will be at any time in the near future.

[edit on 7/24/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by holywar


Sorry, holywar, but if you read that Wired Science article more carefully, and not just look at the photo and jump to premature conclusions, you'll see this snippet:

Formed by ice literally at the boundary where the earth’s atmosphere meets space 50 miles up, they shine because they are so high that they remain lit by the sun even after our star is below the horizon.

My emphasis on the '50 miles up'. That's nearly ten times higher than airplanes can fly. The entire notion of this phenomenom being caused by airplanes "spraying chemtrails" is faulty.

EDIT: Phage got it!! I went to bed too early, last night!!

[edit on 25 July 2009 by weedwhacker]

A Tesla craft will spark away 5 miles up or 50 miles up.
Why not.
Tesla's propulsion knocks off the outer metal fuselage as tiny bits of atoms.
A flying atom smasher might be a more appropriate name.

reply to post by L.HAMILTON


Yes, I saw this also. I found one of the theories on why there have been "no" hurricanes since Katrina a little off. They said the Chinese and/or Russians were behind it. Examine the U. S. treasurer's trips in 2004 back and forth to China. China wants her debts we owe paid in gold, holding mortgage paper, and Gulf Coast property.

I believe a deal was cut, starting with the big easy. HAARP, not our "enemies", sank New Orleans. Why else would FEMA hold people in a stinking coliseum and keep them from going across a bridge (a few hundred yards) to food , safety and camps? The gov wants us as uncomfortable as possible so that when the door at the end of the path opens, we will all gladly run to the light.

Also examine WHEN the insurance companies stop covering Gulf coast (and even much of Florida's) property. Yep, same time.

reply to post by Phage


You spoke of limited reources. I remember when I was in the AF. $200 hammers and $600 toilet seats. You don't really think we were buying those articles at those prices, now do you? It's called padding an account - illegal, of course, but done. As Henry K. said, 'Breaking the law, we do quickly. Breaking the constituion takes a little more time.'

reply to post by Phage


They are called "space planes" and we have them. When I was at Wright-Patt, they were working on ram-jet engines for it. Do some research - you will find the trails of these Mach 10+ planes have a "puff and trail" sort of contrail. This is old news.

reply to post by skycopilot

EXOTIC PROPULSION AIRCRAFT
While the depiction of an Aurora aircraft seems consistent with the confines of present technological imagination, other SR-71 follow-on prognosticators suggest more alien craft. Aviation Week & Space Technology has proposed a current black aircraft that is something akin to a 1960s Sci-Fi concept. They depict an elongated diamond shaped vehicle (one hesitates to call it an aircraft) similar to a "flattened football." The airframe's dimensions might be 110 x 69 feet. Due to intense heat, the vehicle would have a heat-streaked appearance similar to that of the space shuttle. Contrary to intuition, the aft body would appear distinctly more pockmarked than the fore sections, as if the most intense heat was experienced in this region.

This vehicle would have a dual propulsion system. Jet engines buried in the fuselage would propel the vehicle to supersonic speeds, when a novel external burning mechanism would take control as the fundamental propulsion method:

"In the high Mach regime, misted fuel is ejected from the fuselage midsection -- the 'break point' of the elongated diamond -- across the aft surface tiles, into the area between the fuselage and a shock wave attacked to this break. In essence, the sloping, converging aft fuselage sections form the inside of a 'nozzle' and the shock boundary constitutes the outer surface, creating an expanding exhaust effect, much like that on a conventional rocket. The fuel is ignited by surface heating -- or other means -- creating combustion that accelerates the aircraft up to the Mach 6-8 regime."

Eliminating the human life-support requirements at Mach 8, this flaming, hypersonic pumpkin seed would be unmanned and capable of on-board self- control. This vehicle would be as destructive as it is unusual. A payload of 120- odd nuclear weapons would be dispensed as the flaming stone skipped across enemy skies.

The Public Record
The technical and trade press literature includes a number of references to exotic propulsion concepts that may find application in advanced military aircraft. These include pulsed detonation engines, external combustion engines, and waveriding aerodynamics.

Pulsed detonation engines, also referred to as pulsed detonation wave engines:

"... use a shock wave created in a detonation -- an explosion that propagates supersonically -- to compress a fuel-oxidizer mixture prior to combustion, similar to supersonic inlets that make use of external and internal shock wave for pressurization."

Although early experimental work was conducted on such propulsion concepts in the 1940s, a recent review noted:

"... there has been no previously reported use of PDE devices in any past or recent flight vehicle."

"External propulsion," like the "flaming pumpkin seed" mentioned previously, is another hypersonic propulsion technique currently being actively explored. During the 1950s and 1960s research began on exotic external-combustion propulsion systems. An aircraft would achieve hypersonic flight by pumping fuel from its midsection into a cone of air bounded by its shock wave. Interest in this technique continues.

"NASA said yesterday it wants to modify one of its three newly acquired SR-71A Blackbirds to prove the concept of burning hydrogen fuel outside an engine's exhaust nozzles to improve overall flight efficiency....explore a key propulsion concept for the X-30 National Aerospace Plane known as external burning....Engineers want to inject hydrogen fuel into the air stream under the NASP's engines and ignite it to increase pressure near the nozzles and reduce drag....and fly at speeds up to Mach 3."

Another exotic propulsion technique is "waveriding," in which a vehicle's shock wave remains attached to the leading edge of the aircraft's body in hypersonic flight. This makes it appear that the aircraft is riding its own shockwave. It has been reported that at least one aerospace corporation has developed and is marketing a concept for an unmanned hypersonic vehicle that is designed to operate at speeds around Mach 10 or higher.

External Combustion Pulse Detonation Engine Aircraft


Budget and Financial Data
The previous budget analysis pertaining to Aurora is also applicable to the Exotic Propulsion Aircraft. However, while the $1.5 billion appropriated for the Special Update Program is consistent with an effort to develop and test a single high-speed high-altitude aircraft, it is far from clear that this amount would support more than one such effort. It may also be questioned whether decision-makers would choose to carry more than one competing propulsion concept to the prototype flight stage of development.

Thus while budgetary considerations render plausible the existence of test prototypes of either Aurora or a more advanced Exotic Propulsion Aircraft, the simultaneous existence of both is much less plausible. Budget and financial data do not discriminate between the relative plausibility of these two classes of vehicles.

Observer Reports

Copyright © William Telzerow, photographed 11/10/2006

[For some critical commentary on the significance of unusual contrail sightings, see Chris Johnson's Partial Perspective Vortex.]

[edit on 25-7-2009 by Skyfloating]

I watched this same show.

What I noticed in the very brief segment on chemtrails, is how they tied them into HAARP, and weapons. Basically, that HAARP focuses the elf waves into space, and the chemtrails contain a substance that can direct those waves anywhere they want them (to cause weather related disasters, or blameless crimes against humanity).

This explanation is the most logical one I have run across for chemtrails. Weapons and war are always enough reason for our govt to go ahead with these systems.

Before any one dismisses the possibility of the goverment or private enterprise dispersing substances into the air that serve as cloud condensation or ice nuclei, which alter the microphysical processes within the cloud...take a look at this thread, and specifically this post.
abovetopsecret.com

To say that the governemnts resources are limited thus they would not fund such activity is naive. NASA while it has tried to prop up it's squeaky clean image...much information is available that supports this: Nazi Scientist's were taken from Hilter's regime and brought over to the United States and were incorporated into NASA.

Weather as a Force Multiplier:
Owning the Weather in 2025 A USAF Research Paper Study

Nanotechnology also offers possibilities for creating simulated weather. A cloud, or several clouds, of microscopic computer particles, all communicating with each other and with a larger control system could provide tremendous capability. Interconnected, atmospherically buoyant, and having navigation capability in three dimensions, such clouds could be designed to have a wide-range of properties. They might exclusively block optical sensors or could adjust to become impermeable to other surveillance methods. They could also provide an atmospheric electrical potential difference, which otherwise might not exist, to achieve precisely aimed and timed lightning strikes. Even if power levels achieved were insufficient to be an effective strike weapon, the potential for psychological operations in many situations could be fantastic.

One major advantage of using simulated weather to achieve a desired effect is that unlike other approaches, it makes what are otherwise the results of deliberate actions appear to be the consequences of natural weather phenomena. In addition, it is potentially relatively inexpensive to do.

There is no bigger squanderer or waster of money than the government...I think that has been proven in the bail outs.
Aside from that fact...the weather control that is outlilned in the 2025 research paper is about the same price per pound as potatoes. That is vebatim from the study.

Below is an interview with cloud seeding expert Arlen Huggins associate research scientist in the division of atmospheric sciences Research at DRI

Q Tell us a little about the basics of cloud seeding.
A Clouds, whether in summer or winter, are not perfectly efficient at producing precipitation. There's some part of a storm that's much less than 100 percent efficient in turning clouds into precipitation. In winter, the problem is that there aren't sufficient ice crystals. If droplets fall in liquid form they generally evaporate. The idea is to add ice-forming particles.

Q Why silver iodide?
A One thing people discovered early on is that the structure is very similar to that of ice. The lattice structure at the molecular level is very, very close. We think that's why ice wants to bond to it.

Q When did scientists get serious about experimenting with cloud seeding?
A I think it was the day after they finished the experiments in the lab [chuckles]. The initial discoveries were in the 1940s, with substances like silver iodide. It was a short period before they started trying to affect larger systems, without much success.

Q Wasn't Kurt Vonnegut's brother one of the lead scientists in the 1940s?
A Yeah, Bernard Vonnegut.

[Editor's note: Bernard Vonnegut, the older brother of the late novelist Kurt, uncovered silver iodide's weather-modifying properties as a researcher for General Electric in 1946. He later taught atmospheric science at the State University of New York at Albany before passing away in 1997.] SA

Q What are your experiences with cloud seeding?
A My initial experiences were using cloud seeding to try to reduce hail fall. This was in northeast Colorado, where they don't get the massive hail people get in the Midwest, but they got it at a higher frequency. It turned into more of a research project into how hail and thunderstorms work. There was very little evidence that seeding was reducing hail, but we had some success later in increasing snowfall in the Sierra Nevadas, and more success in the mountains of Utah. We were able, in some instances, to monitor the chain of events, following the storms with aircraft. Now we're studying the actual snow for trace concentrations of the seeding material to see how effective the procedure was.

Q Plenty of scientists and organizations have tried to write off cloud seeding. Why does it keep coming back?
A It keeps coming back because of the demand for water, especially the dire straits of the arid Southwest. It's always been seen as a cheap way to add additional water.

[edit on 25-7-2009 by burntheships]

reply to post by burntheships


No one has said cloud seeding does not occur. It has nothing to do with "chemtrails". Cloud seeding is done over small areas, at much lower altitudes than those at which contrails occur.


edit: the paper does mention nanotech.

[edit on 7/30/2009 by Phage]

long been validated... the extent -- and IMPLICATIONS - is the plausible denial.