Chemtrails: US Patent #5003186: Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding For Reduction Of Global Warming

reply to post by weedwhacker


Patents are controlled by the government. They require patents, so that if someone comes up with an idea that the military/government can use to maim, kill and destroy, they take it.

Of course patents are important, to those who need control.

reply to post by Brothers in Arms

Patents are controlled by the government.

Oh, brother!!!

Patents are more like copyrights....

Remember the story of the guy who invented the intermittent windshield wiper (many, many years ago...)

Ford Motor Co. stole the idea from him...but, he had a patent. Ford thought they could out-lawyer him (deeper pockets, and all that...)

But, eventually he won....and a big settlement for YEARS of patent-infringement. (You can look this up, there's this thing called the 'net...)

But, why research when it's easier to just believe in the Big Bad Wolf?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Hazelnut

 

The patents exist.

So what? Really, if you stop to think about it....the MILITARY doesn't need a "patent", does it???

The military doesn't if they originate the idea. If the idea is "owned" by a contractor then the patent allows the contractor post end terms of their contract and NDA to sell the technology.

An example would be our sales to Israel. Some are military sales and some are direct sales from Lockheed.

What is a "patent" for? To Make Money on your invention.

That's stating the obvious. :O

That's it. To be able to claim sole ownership of an idea and invention, to preclude others from profiting off of YOUR idea. Period.

Again, that's an obvious. This whole post is about the particulars of a patent and we are discussing what a patent is? Wow! That's some backtracking...

The will to experiment exists.

Pure speculation. "Will" exists in everything - such a blanket statement as that isn't logical "proof" of anything!

No, it is a logical assumption. Proof is when a hypothesis has gone through research and then peer review. Until then you have assumptions, you have statistics, you have evidence, but no "proof".

Hmmm. You know, sometimes even after peer review you have speculation on your work so "proof" is sometimes relative.

It is logical to assume given the capitalistic and opportunistic nature of man that has been "proven" in behavioral studies and the work of psychologists and philosophers from Maslow to Jung that men try to increase wealth, increase their "share" of things and will utilize methods: inventions, crafts, etc to achieve their desires.

It is illogical to assume otherwise. Truly altruistic individuals rarely create patents, they usually wear robes of some kind and light a lot of incense.

The desire to keep the public in the dark exists.

Now, again...paranoia extraordinaire!

How so? A desire to keep the public in the dark about terrorist plots existence else our economy would collapse for the lack of people leaving the home to shop. A "desire" in this case may be for or against the benefit of humans. The fact is our government has stated many times that there have been threats eliminated that we have yet to hear about and will never hear about.

Were I to use your same brand of cynicism I would think they are just wasting our money at Homeland Security or that the terror threat is over if we have had less than fifteen incidents since 2001. So I will assume they are telling the truth and that they have foiled plots left and right and just chose to keep me in the dark for my own good.

The disinformation campaign exists.

What "disinformation campaign"???? My gosh! It's all over the 'Net! Actually, there is you 'disinfo' campaign...sites like 'carnicorn', et al.

Weedwacker, there is no need for snark. There was a "disinformation campaign" if you would like to call "outright lies" "disinformation post 9-11 that got us into Iraq. It stands to reason that the same people would spread "disinformation" again. Behavioral psychologists would tell you that lying is not only natural, but addictive in some people.

The phenomena in the skies on a regular basis exist. The only problem is that the skies don't lie.

Oh, geeze...why cannot anyone see how illogical this is???

Is it not enough that you see it, Weedwacker?

Cloud seeding is an extension of what they are stating chemtrails to be, and to hyperbolize the argument in such a manner as to imply they are idiotic for taking the next step and wondering about it is rather short-sighted.

If they do not exist, so be it. It is not, however, a laughable matter when the US government and foreign governments will freely admit to allowing chemicals to be dropping into clouds. Chemicals that can affect regional areas are allowed to be dropped into the air. How is chemtrails so different from that?

It is the same thing on a larger scale if it does exist. I, for one, am not pleased with cloud seeding, but no one asked me.

Here: Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to 'spray' terrible chemicals in the skies above the population of the planet, but do it covertly!! For gosh sakes, DON'T LET THEM SEE YOU do it!!!

Oooops...so, the things that are supposed to be covert are plain to see???

You are creating a fallacious argument. That is not the argument. The argument is not that the results are invisible, it is that the contents are secret.

ermmmmm.....sound like contrails, to me.

It cannot be both, why? Would not the product of cloud seeding leave a "trail"? It does in Moscow. I can't imagine they would do it so differently in this country.

On another tack, maybe someone will get it....

Anyone can look up the history of major volcanic eruptions in modern times, and the post-eruption studies of thier effects on the atmosphere.

Has the world come to an end?

Technically speaking, and not trying to fear monger, but the Yellowstone Caldera did in fact destroy life on this continent when it was an active volcano. That's in the textbooks.

But why are you saying they don't exist then arguing that if they do exist they aren't harmful. That's kind like me saying that Santa Clause is a cat burglar.

I don't believe in Santa so what's the point in arguing what he does inside someone's house.

Has there been a major de-population event on a gloabal scale?

Having worked in relief I would ask that you take a look at Niger or Ethiopia. Perhaps not in the west but in other parts of the world they have had major de-population events.

Did all of the sulphur, and other nasty stuff (alleged to be "sprayed' in the so-called "chemtrails" today) cause any permanent physical harm to people on the planet?

I would say the jury is out on that. I can refer you to Johns Hopkins (great medical center) for their research findings on our "health" and attributions.

Because, IF anyone can say "yes" to any of those, then something is terribly wrong with their perception of reality.

That is an assumption on your part meant to get a rise out of people and/or bully them. It is not very nice. No one has been temperamental as yet. Let's keep that way, yes?

NOW....if anyone wishes to claim that HUMANS can possibly compete with a large volcanic outburst, in terms of mass and quantity of material, then by all means, PLEASE show us!!!

Is that the argument? *shakes head* I don't think anyone has stated we are are powerful as Mother Nature.

But again...how does this have anything to do with the patents of the OP?

This sounds like debating chemtrails again and we're heading off topic when there are plenty of posts on those, yes?

So back to the patents... Can anyone tell us anything more about them?






[edit on 26-10-2009 by A Fortiori]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Brothers in Arms

 

Patents are controlled by the government.

Oh, brother!!!

Patents are more like copyrights....

Remember the story of the guy who invented the intermittent windshield wiper (many, many years ago...)

Ford Motor Co. stole the idea from him...but, he had a patent. Ford thought they could out-lawyer him (deeper pockets, and all that...)

But, eventually he won....and a big settlement for YEARS of patent-infringement. (You can look this up, there's this thing called the 'net...)

But, why research when it's easier to just believe in the Big Bad Wolf?

He didn't say the patents were owned by the government, Weed. He said they were controlled by the government.

Why are we laughing again? Isn't that a violation of T&C?

Seriously guys, can't we treat each other like human beings and give each other a modicum of respect?

reply to post by A Fortiori

Why are we laughing again? Isn't that a violation of T&C?

I doubt it...but IF it is, you sent TWO laughies my way already...so, um....

He didn't say the patents were owned by the government, Weed. He said they were controlled by the government.

Trying to take me out of context? I think the intent and implication were quite clear in the use of the term "controlled". That is why I used the copyright analogy.

Perhaps "administered" or "granted" is more to your liking???

But, "controlled by the government" has certain undercurrent intimations, does it not?

Description of 'patents' in a nutshell:

A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state (national government) to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a public disclosure of an invention.

The procedure for granting patents, the requirements placed on the patentee, and the extent of the exclusive rights vary widely between countries according to national laws and international agreements.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by A Fortiori


.....and to this post???

I can only respond thusly:

Whhaaaaaaaattt???????

Sure was a lot of double-talk, which seemed to be intended to alter my entire meaning.

Practicing to be a trial attorney, by any chance?

reply to post by weedwhacker


Weedwacker, we are being off topic. I "laughed" to make a point. You were mocking someone and that never feels good. I figured you needed to see what that feels like. It should be used for the truly funny and not make people feel inferior.

As for my point about patents (again off the topic of the original post), I got what you were stating. I don't think you understood what he was saying so I was clearing it up. Patents are government controlled. Yes, they are like a copyright but in the case of inventions the government has utilized patents of contractors in sole source solicitations.

Sole source solicitations allow the government to find a good idea that no one else is doing (or have SME in) and solicit them for a project.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by A Fortiori

 

.....and to this post???

I can only respond thusly:

Whhaaaaaaaattt???????

Sure was a lot of double-talk, which seemed to be intended to alter my entire meaning.

Practicing to be a trial attorney, by any chance?

It was not double talk. And you would be Mr Pot to my Kettle if you were to accuse me of sectioning your arguments as that is what you just did with Hazelnut.

I am not sure how I misunderstood you, and/or produced double talk. You were purposefully or unintentionally (I'm not sure which) misunderstanding her point.

You created straw men of Hazelnuts post and then made three points of your own.

It seems you are arguing that (in essence):

1) there is no such thing as chemtrails; that the contrails people are seeing are not filled with chemicals they are jet emissions
2) but even if they were they have not produced human suffering, and
3) nature is far more harsh on mankind and we are still here

In reply I argued:

1)that it is possible that there are chemicals also being ejected along with the contrails as happens with seeding.
2)that there is human suffering, the cause of which we have yet to fully understand.
3) I agreed that nature has produced terrible destruction and many people that would have been here are not here, but that was besides the point. Compounding an error is never favorable.

You also scoffed at Hazelnut and made a stretch of some arguments. As a co-conspirator to deny ignorance I thought I would help by pointing out where we are denying it, and that is in the assumption that man is not greedy and does not seek personal gain.

That's all.





[edit on 26-10-2009 by A Fortiori]

[edit on 26-10-2009 by A Fortiori]

Originally posted by Hazelnut
The patents exist. The will to experiment exists. The desire to keep the public in the dark exists. The disinformation campaign exists. The people seeing abnormal phenomena in the skies on a regular basis exist.

Well said and I whole-heartedly agree!

All these factors, combined with my personal experiences, lead me to be sure that something is going on.

More than that: common knowledge of the NATURE of mankind:
- We relentlessly seek to expand our realm into new fields of technology.
- The absolute power that comes with controlling the climate is far beyond our capabilities to ignore and resist.
- For the most part, those in TRUE power (top secret officials at high levels of government which transcend political parties and Presidential term limits) are, by definition, PSYCHOPATHS

Psychopaths would NOT let the opportunity to achieve such technology pass them by.

Dont be confused by the pop-culture sterotype of a psycho path or "PSYCHO". Just because you exhibit traits of a psychopath DOES NOT mean you are a mass murdering nutjob.

In fact I challenge any human being to deny that they share some common traits with the definition of a Psychopath:

- a psychological construct that describes chronic disregard for ethical principles and antisocial behavior.

- defined by an uninhibited gratification in criminal, sexual, or aggressive impulses and the inability to learn from past mistakes

- Individuals with this disorder gain satisfaction through their antisocial behavior and lack remorse for their actions.

- Factor 1: Aggressive narcissism

1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative
5. Lack of remorse or guilt
6. Emotionally shallow
7. Callous/lack of empathy
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

Factor 2: Socially deviant lifestyle

1. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
2. Parasitic lifestyle
3. Poor behavioral control
4. Promiscuous sexual behavior
5. Lack of realistic, long-term goals
6. Impulsiveness
7. Irresponsibility
8. Juvenile delinquency
9. Early behavioral problems
10. Revocation of conditional release

Traits not correlated with either factor

1. Many short-term marital relationships
2. Criminal versatility

Sounds almost like a job application checklist to be a top level PTB (Powers That Be) or NWO (New World Order) member.

[edit on (10/26/09) by AllSeeingI]

Wiki: Geoengineering

WIKI: Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosols (Geoengineering)

The ability of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to create a global dimming effect has made them a possible candidate for use in geoengineering projects[2] to limit the effect and impact of climate change due to rising levels of greenhouse gases.

Tom Wigley calculated the impact of injecting sulfate particles, or aerosols, every one to four years into the stratosphere in amounts equal to those lofted by the volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991

"Tom Wigley is a climate scientist at the WIKI: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)"

WWW.UCAR.COM

CGD 2009 Profiles in Science: Chih-Chieh Chen (Jack Chen)

Since August 2007, Chih-Chieh Chen has been involved in a research project which investigates strategies to counteract global warming effects due to the increase of anthropogenic greenhouse gases (called "geoengineering"). In collaborating with Drs. Phil Rasch and John Latham, he has focused the scope of his research on the strategy of enhancing cloud albedo through warm cloud seeding and studying its impact on global and regional climate.

CGD 2009 Profiles in Science: Dr. Phil Rasch

out standing work!

Every topic we discuss here seems proven when good people dont just turn over and play dead.

We know they lie, we know that we have real love and good backing us. There will be a drop off this plateau soon and then an asenscion. The drop is natural I suppose. Perhaps we allready got pushed off the edge.

God help them, I forgive them but I know some hard pipe hitting mutha's that would tune up theese jerks for a lil of the product they sneak in.

Ouch Vicous cycle

Originally posted by Jb0311NY
I know some hard pipe hitting mutha's ...

"Bout to go to work on ya with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch. YOU HEAR ME HILLBILLY BOY? I aint over by a damn sight.... IM GONNA GET MEDIEVAL on YOUR @SS...!"
-Pulp Fiction

Love that movie.

Movies are great inspiration and encouragement to keep a stiff-upper lip and your head up when everyone seems against you. When you got 100 people telling you that you are crazy and a fool... To stand alone and keep fighting...

Many times in the past few years I have been faced with enormous resistance to my ideas, beliefs, and theories. From friends and family, to faceless ATS foes... disbelief and and obstacles hurled my way... has made it very hard at times to keep going.

This compilation of 40 inspirational movies clips is funny.... and may have been put together as a joke.... but I cant help but feel Inspired and a bit emotional when watching it.

Knowing that one day the chips will be VERY down... and REAL LIFE moments of encouragement and inspiration will be needed just to keep on living.




[edit on (10/26/09) by AllSeeingI]

Originally posted by Libertygal
I saw this covered in the news a while back, surprised it passed by ATS' watchful eyes.

Obama was/is actually considering chemtrails to change global warming.
www.articlesbase.com...#

"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.” "

I was personally a bit disturbed by this when I read about it. There are multiple articles covering it, this was just the first one I found on Google.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I had not seen this information. I encourage everyone to go take a look for yourselves.
OBAMA CONSIDERS CHEMTRAILS
Here are some of the big hit points:

CHEMTRAILS CONFIRMED
First confirmed by Airport Authority Terry Stewart at the Victoria International Airport on Dec. 8, 2000 as a “joint Canada-U.S. military operation

CHEMTRAIL SCIENTISTS SPEAK OUT
Ohio is the home of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base tasked with developing Tesla, HAARP and related weather modification technology. In December 2001, a Lawrence Livermore scientist on loan to Wright-Pat told Columbus Alive reporter Bob Fitrakis that two different projects were being conducted. One involved spraying microscopic aluminum particles parallel lines, X-patterns and grids to create artificial cloud cover and lessen global warming. Barium chemtrails were being used to direct the military's beam weapon in Alaska called HAARP for 3-D imaging, electronic warfare – and steering the jet stream. [Columbus Alive Dec 6/01]

[edit on (10/27/09) by AllSeeingI]

I have suspected that the aircraft which is primarily used for these operations would be a variant of the KC-135 Stratotanker.

As of May 2002, the Air Force had 545 KC-135 Tankers, 134 E Models and 411 R Models. In order to replace the aging E Models and thereby save maintenance costs, the Air Force proposed leasing 100 Boeing 767 Tanker/Transport aircraft to replace 127 E Models of KC-135. This plan would be completed by 2009, with seed money for the project first appearing in the FY05 budget.

WIKI: KC-135

It would be a logical aircraft for such an operation as this for the following reasons:
- The military has lots of them.

- They look like regular airliners from the ground when flying at cruising altitude.

- They have huge carrying capacity, and TANKS for substances.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/683465f47bdb.jpg[/atsimg]

General Characteristics
Primary Function: Aerial refueling and airlift
Prime Contractor: The Boeing Company
Power Plant: CFM International CFM-56 turbofan engines
Thrust: 21,634 pounds each engine
Wingspan: 130 feet, 10 inches (39.88 meters)
Length: 136 feet, 3 inches (41.53 meters)
Height: 41 feet, 8 inches (12.7 meters)
Speed: 530 miles per hour at 30,000 feet (9,144 meters)
Ceiling: 50,000 feet (15,240 meters)
Range: 1,500 miles (2,419 kilometers) with 150,000 pounds (68,039 kilograms) of transfer fuel; ferry mission, up to 11,015 miles (17,766 kilometers)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 322,500 pounds (146,285 kilograms)
Maximum Transfer Fuel Load: 200,000 pounds (90,719 kilograms)
Maximum Cargo Capability: 83,000 pounds (37,648 kilograms), 37 passengers
Pallet Positions: 6
Crew: Three: pilot, co-pilot and boom operator. Some KC-135 missions require the addition of a navigator. The Air Force has a limited number of navigator suites that can be installed for unique missions.
Aeromedical Evacuation Crew: A basic crew of five (two flight nurses and three medical technicians) is added for aeromedical evacuation missions. Medical crew may be altered as required by the needs of patients.
Unit Cost: $39.6 million (fiscal 98 constant dollars)
Date Deployed: August 1956
Inventory: Active duty, 180; Air National Guard, 171; Air Force Reserve, 64

[edit on (10/27/09) by AllSeeingI]

Boeing KC-767
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/89bb097f8496.jpg[/atsimg]

General characteristics

* Crew: 3: 2 pilots, 1 boom operator
* Capacity: up to 200 passengers or 19 463L pallets
* Length: 159 ft 2 in (48.5 m)
* Wingspan: 156 ft 1 in (47.6 m)
* Height: 52 ft (15.8 m)
* Empty weight: 181,610 lb (82,377 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 395,000 lb (186,880 kg)
* Powerplant: 2× GE CF6-80C2 turbofan, 60,200 lbf (268 kN) each
* Maximum Fuel Load: 160,660 lb (72,877 kg)

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 0.86 (570 mph, 915 km/h)
* Cruise speed: Mach 0.80 (530 mph, 851 km/h)
* Range: 6,385 nmi (12,200 km)
* Service ceiling: 40,100 ft (12,200 m)
* For KC-767 Advanced Tanker:[44]
o Max takeoff weight: over 400,000 lb (181,000 kg)
o Maximum Fuel Load: over 202,000 lb (91,600 kg)

reply to post by Hazelnut


Unless stringent testing on the effects of cloud seeding were done on human health beforehand, then although the intention wasn't to poison us, how can they then say with any degree of certainty that it isn't causing ill health and death?

I'm sure IF they did do stringent tests it would be in the medical literature somewhere. Somehow I doubt we'd find it, cause it doesn't exist.


[edit on 27-10-2009 by Flighty]

reply to post by Flighty


Cloud seeding has been carried out since the 50's so there is a lot of documentation of it's effects.

To give you an idea of how much get's released when they carry out seeding, about 150 grams of silver iodide is mixed in a solution of about 25 to 27 litres of acetone nd that takes about three and a quarter hours to burn.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also, an interesting report from NIOSH, where they carried out a health hazard test at a cloud seeding flare manufacturer.

www.cdc.gov...

I'm confused.

Are we talking about "chemtrails" (aka white lines comprised of deadly dihyrogen monoxide crystals) or are we talking about the proposal to geoengineer the atmosphere by spraying aerosols into the stratosphere to replicate the cooling effects of large equatorial volcanic eruptions and thus counter global warming?

As already shown, the later is subject to a great deal of study at present and the tide of opinion is turning against it being a viable option.

I'm assuming the purpose of the thread is to argue in favour of it?

reply to post by Essan

I'm confused.

Are we talking about "chemtrails" (aka white lines comprised of deadly dihyrogen monoxide crystals) or are we talking about the proposal to geoengineer the atmosphere by spraying aerosols into the stratosphere to replicate the cooling effects of large equatorial volcanic eruptions and thus counter global warming?

The latter, but people want to continue the same old "chemtrail-contrail" "I'm right and you're an idiot" debate that has been picked to death on other threads much to the yawns of us all.

What is truly interesting about the original post is the idea of using such a technique to stave off the rapidity of global warming. The idea of cooling the planet by mimicking a volcanic eruption had been floated for years, and in some respects is far more reasonable than the Carbon Tax. However, the long term effects on organic life and whether there is a "purpose" for this particular cycle of natural events that we might be offsetting is yet to be discovered.

Having worked with the government I can say truly that their forte is not "long term" and they seem to have a reverse midas touch when it comes to public health as you can see from the increased weight of the average American, and the supposed "safe" allowance of chemicals in runoffs that have made many of our scenic rivers off limits to any fishing other than sport. If I had a nickel for every amended mandate by government agencies as to what is "safe" I would be living in Nice and sipping champagne with my handsome pool boy, Phillip.

Chadwickus brought up a health publication by NIOSH, a good example of an agency that has had to amend standards for respiratory protections in the past as new data is presented.

As much as I would love to entertain the idea, the fact is that there is not a lot of research money dedicated to "safety" proportionate to other agencies, such as DOD. Many times they rely on papers that have been organically submitted, and in those cases one has to wonder about the agenda. A prime example being when the EPA funded a few studies on the effects of second hand smoking, and was challenged with research funded by the tobacco companies. It was a kick in the pants and took years to find other supporting research to support their mandate.

Again, would love an answer to cooling the planet, but not sure about placing my trust in the government when they tell me something is "safe". Their process for declaring something "safe" is not on par with private institutions, and many times is heavily influenced by lobbyists.

Originally posted by A Fortiori

What is truly interesting about the original post is the idea of using such a technique to stave off the rapidity of global warming. The idea of cooling the planet by mimicking a volcanic eruption had been floated for years, and in some respects is far more reasonable than the Carbon Tax. However, the long term effects on organic life and whether there is a "purpose" for this particular cycle of natural events that we might be offsetting is yet to be discovered.

A star from me

That's a subject I think is interesting to discuss - the feasiblity of such and the potential problems. I am though very bored with the endless circualr arguments on contrails/chemtrails!

Although the OP is not actually about sulphate aerosols, that is nontheless one of the most oft made suggestions and I find it a little ironic than in the 70s and 80s we deliberately acted to reduce sulphur emissions from industry in order to stop 'acid rain' - a now largely forgotten 'environmental disaster' - and here we are now suggesting we deliberately increase them again. Some have suggested the increase in global temps from the mid 70s onwards may have been in part a result of our reduction in sulphur emissions (which were previoulsy helping to keep temps down).

I'll see how this thread is looking tomorrow and hopefully we can swing it around to a useful and informative discussion on the subject