Chemtrail Debunkers are Losing.

Hi, SantaClaus.

Usualy, your answers are reasonable. . .

Originally posted by SantaClaus
The true contributors to this thread, the ones who don't believe that trails are of a nefarious nature, are PROFESSIONALS.

. . .but this time you made a little error.

I AM/WAS a professional, retired in one field, and I also am a pilot, but
I don't boast/brag about it [ excep today B-) ] pages and pages and pages
and pages and pages. . .long, with a superiority complex !

What you and me could conclude is: We DO NOT KNOW the **variety** of the
"crafts/professions" that read and write in this forum. And some are more humble
about it than others, don't you think ???
And now? back to topics and readings. . . B-)

Blue skies.

reply to post by banned4life

...how about that first video starting @ 1:34? why no explanation from u there? u can't that's why...

Phage need not respond to your juvenile taunts.

I did already. Care to read and learn???

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by banned4life

 

...starting at 1:34 in the video...

Uh huh. That, my friend, at 1:34 is a normal CONTRAIL, produced by the jet engine exhaust, being broken up by the TURBULENCE in the atmosphere!

i don't buy that, but i'll definitley consider it as a 50/50 possibility. i have no fear of ruling out conclusions that are in error based on observations..that's what i want actually. what sane person wouldn't? but so far nobody has addressed the very first video i posted. ?why? i think that fact alone speaks far more than any debunker on ats could possibly say about explaining ALL away.

the bottom line here is folks, you don't have much time left..soon it's going public. so give it all you got you debunkers. the party will be over soon and you will be forced to move on to another subject.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by banned4life]

reply to post by banned4life


Which "very first video" again??

Excuse me while I go look, brb......
__________________________________________________

Do you mean the one in...what is it? Italian? Portuguese?

THIS one??





OK...saw it again.

Here's what it was: Three airplanes, regualr commercial jets, at THREE different altitudes. One, higher altitude, no contrail. Other two, forming contrails, they were close laterally, so they HAD to be separated by 1,000 feet vertically, that is normal with today's modern airplanes. 1,000 feet is less than 1/4 mile!! When you're looking at airplanes 6-7 miles above you, you cannot determine the various heights.

Contrails will form/not form because of differences in the atmosphere, and the Relative Humidity. This is not "disinfo", it is fact. Truth. Science.

Also, it looks like the one airplane whose contrail stopped first likely was CLIMBING, and that's the reason the contrail ceased.

This is filmed somewhere other than the USA, obviously. Do you know where? Because, it looked very much like those airplanes were about to do an Oceanic crossing, on International flights. Oceanic air routes are commonly "anchored" at specific points, with land-based references. You see that kind of air traffic over the busy routes, ESPECIALLY the Atlantic!!!

Understanding and knowledge. Helps to see the truth.









[edit on 24 August 2009 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by C-JEAN


Yeah retracting that statement would've been in my best interest. I get rather worked up sometimes in these types of threads... Add a few beers and you get an unfairly biased SantaClaus. Sorry. You called me out, I admit.

Originally posted by C-JEAN
What you and me could conclude is: We DO NOT KNOW the **variety** of the
"crafts/professions" that read and write in this forum. And some are more humble about it than others, don't you think ???
And now? back to topics and readings. . . B-)

Blue skies.

well spoken

reply to post by banned4life

Do you mean the split in the shadow? It's not too hard to figure out.

There are two cloud decks, one higher than the other. When the shadow crosses from one to the next it shifts because of the angle of the sunlight.

@weedwhacker

Anytime you try and refute somebody you throw in the "spraying" angle of chemtrails. Not everyone is accusing that of happening.

Do you think that the U.S. has a position on weather control or geo-engineering?

Do you think they have a possible distribution system to do this?

Could it be from specialized military planes designed to do this, that you might not be privileged to?

I am not calling you a disinfo agent, because I don't think you're that important, but I do find it very suspicious that you continually cherry pick peoples posts and take things out of context EVERYTIME you can.

When ideas such as geo-engineering/chemtrails hit the MSM, IMHO, it is a pH test to gauge public reaction, and to desensitize for larger projects down the road.

I posted these earlier, and albeit it is a MSM Rolling Stone Article, the scientist who is suggesting the ideas of geoengineering via aersol with aluminum/sulfure particles is a helluvalot more accomplished then anyone in these forums.

The picture paints him a sinister guy, mainly due to the beliefs he held about nuclear technology, but if this guy is suggesting it theres a good chance it's already happening...and guess what, YOU may not even know about it. Amazing isn't it.

Wood is infamous for championing fringe science, from X-ray lasers to cold-fusion nuclear reactors, as well as for his long affiliation with the Hoover Institution, a right-wing think tank on the Stanford campus.

Getting the particles into the stratosphere wouldn't be a problem — you could generate them easily enough by burning sulfur, then dumping the particles out of high-flying 747s, spraying them into the sky with long hoses or even shooting them up there with naval artillery.

Until recently, discussion of geoengineering — intentional, large-scale manipulation of the Earth's climate — has been taboo among scientists.

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. military used cloud seeding in an attempt to increase rainfall over the Ho Chi Minh Trail — a secret program that prompted the United Nations to ban "environmental modification techniques" as weapons.

Notice in this next quote, he IMPLIES denial, but he does not deny.

A secret government conspiracy? One of the remarkable things I've learned about working with the government is that there are no secrets. It's all out there. You just have to know where to look.

I completely realize this won't change certain peoples minds, but the information is here showing it is being talked about, and is already possible.

United States Patent RE29,142 Papee , et al. February 22, 1977 Combustible compositions for generating aerosols, particularly suitable for cloud modification and weather control and aerosolization process Abstract A combustible composition for generating aerosols for the control and modification of weather conditions consisting of a readily oxidizable substance selected from the group consisting of aluminum, magnesium, alkali-metals and alkaline earth metals; an oxidizing agent selected from the groups consisting of: (a) sulphur and sulphur yielding compounds; and (b) organic and inorganic nitrates, alkali-metal and ammonium chlorates and perchlorates; The molar ratio of the oxidizable substance to the oxidizing agent being between 1.5:1 and 3.5:1 and a stable hygroscopic solid which does not directly participate in the combustion process of the combustible composition, said hygroscopic solid being present in an amount up to 40% of the total weight of the combustible composition, the oxidizable substance, the oxidizing agent and the hygroscopic substance having a particle size in the range of from -140 to +270 mesh, and a primer initiating the combustion of said composition whereby during combustion, a finely dispersed aerosol smoke consisting of moderately hygroscopic condensation nuclei, and a non-hygroscopic gas are simultaneously evolved, said gas acting to disperse said nuclei. .Iadd. Inventors: Papee; Henry M. (Rome, IT), Montefinale; Alberto C. (Rome, IT), Petriconi; Gianna L. (Rome, IT), Zawidzky; Tadeusz W. (Ottawa, CA) Assignee: Consiglio Nazionale delle Richerche (Rome, IT) Appl. No.: 05/362,680 Filed: May 22, 1973 Related U.S. Patent Documents Application Number Filing Date Patent Number Issue Date Current U.S. Class: 516/2 ; 102/334; 149/117; 149/19.1; 149/43; 239/2.1; 252/183.13; 252/183.14; 252/186.1; 252/186.24; 252/186.44; 252/187.31 Current International Class: A01G 15/00 (20060101); A01G 015/00 (); C09K 003/30 (); E01H 013/00 () Field of Search: 252/305,319,186 149/43 239/2R,2S References Cited [Referenced By] U.S. Patent Documents 2232728 February 1941 Pleasants 2409201 October 1946 Finkelstein et al. 2614083 October 1952 Bailar, Jr. et al. 2633455 March 1953 Finkelstein et al. 3044911 July 1962 Fritzlen 3120459 February 1964 Coates et al. 3257801 June 1966 Martinez et al. Primary Examiner: Lovering; Richard D. Attorney, Agent or Firm: George H. Riches and Associates Parent Case Text This application is a continuation-in-part of our pending application Ser. No. 742,956 filed on June 19, 1968, now abandoned, which was a streamline continuation of our application Ser. No. 444,923 filed Mar. 22, 1965, now abandoned, and which was a continuation-in-part of our application Ser. No. 392,809 filed Aug. 28, 1964, now abandoned. .Iaddend. .[.This application is a continuation-in-part of our pending U.S. application Ser. No. 742,956, filed on June 19, 1968, now abandoned..]. Claims What we claim is: 1. A combustible composition consisting of a readily oxidizable substance selected from the group consisting of aluminum, magnesium, alkali-metals and alkaline earth metals; an oxidizing agent selected from the groups consisting of: (a) sulphur and sulphur yielding compounds; and (b) organic and inorganic nitrates, alkali-metal and ammonium chlorates and perchlorates; the molar ratio of the oxidizable substance to the oxidizing agent being between 1.5:1 and 3.5:1 and a stable hygroscopic solid to be dispersed which does not directly participate in the combustion process of the combustible composition, said hygroscopic solid being present in an amount up to 40% of the total weight of the combustible composition, the oxidizable substance, the oxidizing agent and the stable hygroscopic solid having a particle size in the range of from -140 to +270 mesh, and a fused compound which burns initiating the combustion of said composition, whereby during combustion, a finely dispersed aerosol smoke consisting essentially of moderately hygroscopic condensation giant nuclei and a non-hygroscopic gas are simultaneously evolved, said gas acting to disperse said nuclei, thereby generating aerosol smoke and a non-hygroscopic gas which control and modify weather conditions. 2. Combustible compositions according to claim 1, in which the oxidizable substance is aluminum and the oxidizing agent is selected from the group consisting of inorganic and organic nitrates which are stable at room temperature. 3. A combustible composition according to claim 1 in which said stable hygroscopic solid is selected from the group consisting of metal halides. 4. Combustible compositions according to claim 3 in which the oxidizable substance is aluminum, the oxidizing agent is selected from the group consisting of sodium and potassium nitrates, the stable hygroscopic solid is selected from the group consisting of sodium and potassium chloride, and wherein the weight percentage of the chloride in the mixture is in an amount up to 40% of the total weight of the combustible composition. 5. A combustible composition according to claim 1 in which the oxidizing agent, the oxidizable substance and the hygroscopic solid are amalgamated in the presence of a binder selected from the group consisting of organic and inorganic binders, the resulting amalgam being enclosed within a container, thereby forming a combustible candle. 6. A combustible composition according to claim 5 in which the candle has a central core comprising a metal containing substance capable of yielding free metal by thermal decomposition. 7. Combustible compositions according to claim 1 in which the oxidizable substance is aluminum metal and the oxidizing agent is selected from the group consisting of sodium and potassium nitrates, and wherein the molar ratio of aluminum to nitrate is in the range of between 1.5:1 and 3.5:1. 8. A combustible composition according to claim 6 in which the metal of the metal containing substance is selected from the group consisting of sodium metal and potassium metal. 9. A combustible composition according to claim 6 in which the core has an outer casing formed of a polymer. 10. A combustible composition according to claim 6 in which the core has an outer casing formed of aluminum. 11. A combustible composition according to claim 6 in which the core has an outer casing formed of resin impregnated glass fibers.

[edit on 8/24/2009 by semperfortis]

reply to post by brocket99



Thank you for your questions.

Do you think that the U.S. has a position on weather control or geo-engineering?

It is not disputed that there are methods of "weather control" available, that has been shown. It's the SCALE of such modification techniques that is where the "chemtrail" theories start to become implausible.

The "position" of the U.S.? I think that they're still in study mode. As to the "geo-engineering" that is discussed, when you read carefully it seems that they are, again, studying possible methods, should it be deemed necessary to resort to using them. The planet, and our very survival as a species, would have to be in dire threat. It would be stupid to NOT conduct the research, as a "just in case".

Do you think they have a possible distribution system to do this?

Again, certainly there are small-scale capabilities. Localized. Ask the meteorologists here, who make it their profession, to explain weather, and how complicated it is on a larger scale. It is very unpredictable, we learn more and more every day from observing, but no one has enough info yet to have complete "control", not on the massive scales some "chmetrail" scare-sites suggest. Again, I don't doubt people are studying and designing methods for future use, should they be allowed to implement them.

Could it be from specialized military planes designed to do this, that you might not be privileged to?

Well, that's obvious. But, the caveat as above...the SIZE of an operation is so immense, it just seems unlikely that the technology is perfected. Testing.....

I am not calling you a disinfo agent...

Good...because the very term is A) Insulting, B) Incorrect way to describe someone speaking the truth, and C) Better description of the "chemtrail" websites. THEY are the ones spreading disinfo. Or, outright lies.

...because I don't think you're that important...

If I had feelings, they would be hurt. But since I am a cybernetic Human hybrid, it's just sticks and stones. nanner, nanner.

...find it very suspicious that you continually cherry pick peoples posts and take things out of context EVERYTIME you can.

Sorry you don't comprehend what I write. It is THEY who have selectively "cherry-picked" some bad cherries, and tossed them into the posts. There are good posts, with good info, but sometimes the conclusions drawn are based on misconceptions.

My goal is to provide information, unsullied by nonsense. Problem is, for some reason, many treat the "chemtrail" phenomenon as a "belief", and are emotionally attached to the concept. Facts aren't readily accepted in those situations.

It's a shame. Education is supposed to enhance people, but it only works if they care to learn.
___________________________________________
Oh, I forgot. The patent info you posted, from 1977.

This has been discussed on other threads, it's really all about cloud seeding. Remember the theory of patents...it's for those who have what they (and the Gov't) think is a new design, so that they have exclusive rights to it (and potential profit, if it comes to that).



[edit on 24 August 2009 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker


Thanks for commenting on my post. It was rude of me to say you're not that important. I didn't realize it until I read it.

I think the issue you with your posts, making them difficult to read is you cut up someones opinion and selectively comment on bits and pieces. It might be easier for you to pick EXACTLY what you comment on, but it makes it tougher on the reader to understand your points fully.

I do understand your points, but hacked up the way they are it becomes difficult to put everything in context.

I am also glad you at least admit that there is the possibility of the weather mods and geo-engineering going on. I personally find it fine that we may disagree to the extent, as you do not believe it could be done on such a grand scale currently(I don't believe that all the rich people in the world are in it together i.e. Illuminati etc.)

After the past 8 years, and even into our current administration, it would not surprise me if they were secretly using the technology Dr. Wood explains in his article. Are they doing it well? Is it working? Is it hurting us? Is it helping anything? I don't have those answers.

What I do know is planes have been in the air for a while now, and I have never seen as many contrails in the sky as I have the past 10 years or so. I realize atmoshpher and levels play a role.

The tougher part is to think I didn't notice these exact same trails hovering in the atmosphere for 20 years???

reply to post by brocket99

The tougher part is to think I didn't notice these exact same trails hovering in the atmosphere for 20 years???

I explained that to Hazelnut somewhere, maybe this thread.

The design of the engines has changed, especially in the last 20 years.

In efforts to make engines more fuel efficient, while increasing thrust-to-weight ratios, AND amking them quieter, it all came together to make the exahust gas temperatures different than the older straight turbojets.

This is well covered and found by googling.

Just as you see the contrails from B-17s in WW II footage, yes those are piston engines, but their exhaust gases were hot, and formed contrails.

Turbojet engines produce a concentrated, hotter narrow exhaust flow, so the contrails formed differently. Thinner.

High-bypass turbofans produce most of their thrust from the big shrouded fan (the N1 fan) in front. It acts like a multi-bladed propeller. The diameter of the N1 fan is far greater than the core engine sections. ALL of that air fromthe fan is ducted around the inner core, and it exits the rear and surrounds the hot exhaust out the turbine section, and by so doing it tends to "muffle" the sound of the exhaust.

So, engine designers killed several birds in one design concept.

More fuel effeciency, better thrust for fuel burned, and quieter to meet ever-increasing Federal and International noise requirements.

The side effect?? Fatter, thicker longer lasting (where conditions are suitable) contrails.

It is purely coincidence that the InterTubes took off at about the same time air traffic was increasing, in a boom (the 1990s) and the newer engine technology and designs were becoming more and more prevalent.

Today, in the US, you don't see the Older B737-100/200 anymore, because they're old!! AND the engines were the old JT-8D turbojets. Loud, smoky and thirsty. Same with the B727. The old DC-8. Of course, the B707, very old (although John Travolta has one...he pays noise fines when his noisy beast violates the monitors).

Versions, modified and "in-between" versions of the JT-8D are operated on the MD-80 (now called the B717). NorthWest (now Delta) still has old DC-9s, phasing them out, because of the engines...eventually.

So, in a nutshell....more contrails? More airplanes, different engines. That is it.

reply to post by weedwhacker


That was a reasonable explanation.

Thanks.

Huh... you'd think if chemicals were being sprayed routinely after major cities — sometimes so heavily it creates a "fog" and makes people feel sick and lethargic — that plenty of chemical evidence that is out of the normal types and amounts would be found in groundwater and soil samples. But... it's not. Why?

I verified some of the information today with a fellow I truly respect. His credentials are sickening, and since I run into him now and then I posed some of the scenarios.

He explained(as I am sure some of you have) that when the temperatures are right, the contrails and can start and stop as they hit different atmospheres, since they are split up in levels.

He also explained that the condensation are essentially ice crystals, I believe he compared them to cirrus clouds, and will spread out over time to create that haze...but it is basically an ice sheath.

He dumbed it down for me.

If you're wondering what his degree is, he has PhD in mechanical and electrical engineering, was the head prof and department chair at the largest local public university in those departments, and his son has been a pilot for the last 8 years. He also fixed out monorail, and builds stuff you wouldn't believe.

He didn't know exactly if the change to the mechanics of an engine would make a different, but did explain when and how the jet engines changed.


And finally...

He said using a greenhouse causing jet often enough to modify the weather, or counteract the effects of the greenhouse gasses makes no sense. He went into detail, but I can't remember it all.

Hi debunker guys! The 9/11 threads are pretty dead now huh?
No chance of an independant investigation anymore right?
Edit to add:
We may as well call all the conspiracy theoryists nutjobs right now for even questioning anything?
I would call THAT crazy given past history.(example; wars, genocide, etc)
The proofs in the pudding and its already been passed around.
(BTW, look the other way while your money is given to the too big to fail.
Can you explain why other than crazy? Nevermind , off topic..)

Just some more stuff I found on chemtrails I thought I'd post.
Ignore it and/or put me and my posts down at will....
if it makes ya feel better. Me? Could care less, all just in fun anyway.

Rep Kucinich Rewrites HR 2977 - 'Chemtrails' Disappear

The "Space Preservation Act of 2001" originally introduced in the House by Rep. Dennis Kucinich as HR 2977 has been re-written.
By its conspicuous appearance in 2977, the term 'chemtrails' received a form of credibiity within the official government process never seen before...In fact, 'Exotic Weapons' - as boldly-stated in HR 2977 - are not even mentioned in HR 3616. So, what happened here? Did someone have a 'friendly chat' with Rep. Kucinich?

www.lightwatcher.com...
Lotsa good info here by an investigator, yes with soil tests too, whee who!
www.holmestead.ca...

We can trace the beginnings of Operation Cloverleaf right to the Strangelove brain of Dr. Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb and proponent of nuking inhabited coast lines to rearrange them for economic projects.31 Before he died in 2003, Teller was director emeritus of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, where plans for nuclear, biological and directed energy weapons are crafted. In 1997, Teller publicly outlined his proposal to use aircraft to scatter in the stratosphere millions of tons of electrically-conductive metallic materials, ostensibly to reduce global warming.

www.envirosagainstwar.org...
Oh oh whats this? The very patent for the process?

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

www.lightwatcher.com...
Interesting stuff here:
weatherwars.info...
More stuff:

If the chemtrail operations seem too big to keep under wraps, consider the Manhattan Project (which developed the A-bomb). It was equivalent in size to the American automobile industry, employing 130,000 people! It was kept entirely secret by utilizing compartmentalization, a current practice which keeps knowledge divided and separate.

www.bariumblues.com...
www.youtube.com...

JP8 jet fuel is laced with Ethylene Dibromide (EDB), a chemical pesticide banned by the EPA as a definite carcinogen and chemical toxin. In addition, chemtrails contain Aluminum (a metal associated with Alzheimer's Disease) and Barium (a radioactive substance). Fox News reports green lightning in storms. Barium aerosol ionizes green as it electrically conducts from ground to sky. The Chemtrail Ops program is run by the ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence). The overall scope and agenda behind Chemtrails (Operation Clover Leaf, Operation Red Sky, Operation Rain Dance, the code names for these ops, BTW) intertwines several overall objectives deemed imperative by the real power in DC, which is the NSA.

www.nogw.com...
Lotsa good links at the bottom of this page:
www.laleva.org...
la.indymedia.org...
Nevermind, this says they stopped in 2001! I can breath again! Yay!
Wasn't this NOT supposed to be going on in the first place? Hmmmm....

The following declassified U.S. Government documents can be obtained from:Office of the Inspector General
Pattie Cirino
Chief, FOIA/PA Office
400 Army Navy Drive, Room 405
Arlington, VA 22202-2885
(703) 604-9775
fax number: (703) 604-9792
e-mail address: [email protected]
Operation Cloverleaf, 200001475-K, closed 22 June 2001;

Another wonderfull page with stuff like this:

Method of modifying weather United States Patent 6,315,213 / Cordani / November 13, 2001 A method for artificially modifying the weather by seeding rain clouds of a storm with suitable cross-linked aqueous polymer. The polymer is dispersed into the cloud and the wind of the storm agitates the mixture causing the polymer to absorb the rain. This reaction forms a gelatinous substance which precipitate to the surface below. Thus, diminishing the clouds ability to rain.

United States Patent: - US3813875 / Issued/Filed Dates: June 4, 1974 / April 28, 1972
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

www.losangelesskywatch.com...
Is it true? Who knows. I'm sure no one here knows either way for sure.
No one likes to be compartmentalized!
www.tetrahedron.org...

It'd be kinda nice if they are blocking the sun,
I run a little on the hot side anyway!


[edit on 24-8-2009 by dodadoom]

reply to post by dodadoom


Just about ALL of those references were discussed at length in wonderworld's thread.

YOu should check out an actual study thread, going now, started by OzWeatherman. I'll find the link....

Here it is: Contrail / Chemtrail Research Thread

[edit on 24 August 2009 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker

Thanks. I am. Interesting, like all of it.
Including crop circles and aliens! Fun stuff!
Thanks again.
Interesting also is questioningalls thread on them.
Also the Space Preservation Act of 2001 is interesting!
As well as the verifiable declassified documents and patent numbers
pertaining to said topic!
Heres one too:
abovetopsecret.com...
And this one:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Most of my post has been debunked already? I'm sure.
So, just none of it is real now? Move along?
What about whats left after most of it?
www.checktheevidence.com...


[edit on 24-8-2009 by dodadoom]

Originally posted by Udontknowme
Cloud seeding is shown to be done on smaller, experimental levels, so why would it be so hard to believe that the commercial airliners are being paid to aid water boards to create more waterfall in river basins, etc.

I've looked at the planes causing chemtrails through binoculars, and have NEVER seen a commercial aircraft. All I've ever seen are white, unmarked (presumably military) aircraft doing this. Of course I don't spend all day watching chemtrails, but from what I've seen commercial flights have nothing to do with them. Someday maybe I WILL spend the whole day watching and logging what I see, to be sure.

reply to post by AntiNWO


Military airplanes are rarely all white, and unmarked. Usually a camoflauge green, or light grey.

Problem with observing the airplanes, even with binoculars, is that they tend to appear all white, because of the brightness of the sunlight and the glare. AND, depends a lot on the paint scheme.

Hi, AntiNWO.

Originally posted by AntiNWO
...have NEVER seen a commercial aircraft. All I've ever seen are white, unmarked (presumably military) aircraft doing this.

See this as a confirmation of your observations :
Extensive, well done report !
www.chemtrailcentral.com...
Go 3/4 down the page and see the graph with 4 pink dots !
How bizarre: "the unregistered" planes do the chemtrails ! B-)

Now some main stream informant will say the link is no good.
We know VERY well what
MSMedia is worth,
MSPharma,
MSarmament,
MSDebunkers with their
MSLinks and
MSThinking. . . B-)

Blue skies.