G. Edward Griffin Goes On Record in Video About Chemtrails Conspiracy

Originally posted by SuZQQQ
Contrails are produced at high altitude of 25-30K + ft and leave a very short term trail lasting from seconds to max of a minute depending on contrast of air conditions - condensation.

Sorry, complete and utter uneducated RUBBISH.

If the atmosphere is super saturated (and it often is at 20-35k), the output of a jet engine (mostly water vapour and some combustion products) will cause trails that not only last, but will grow into fully fledged cirrus clouds.

If it is right on saturation, the trails will be lasting, but not grow.

If it is under saturation, the trails will be short, or not appear at all.

In other words, whether a contrail will be short, long or cloud-bank-producing depends entirely on the conditions, and THIS IS EXACTLY HOW CLOUDS FORM.

It is one of the most basic meteorological processes. As you ascend the air gets colder and more water saturated (ok, that's simplified, but it obviously needs to be, here...). The high, cold air may reach saturation point, but nothing happens initially as there are no 'seeds' (dust, smoke, air disturbances). The saturation levels can get well past the point at which clouds should form ('super-saturated') if the air is very clean. (This is analagous to a cup of clean water that has been 'superheated' in a microwave. It may not boil even well past boiling point, but put in a teaspoon of anything, and it will suddenly (and dangerously) 'explode'..)

Eventually, after air becomes too saturated, then natural cirrus clouds will form.

And a passing jet engine, spewing out water vapour, can be the needed trigger. This is *really* basic stuff.


Hint - if you want to push chemtrails, DON'T prove yourself to be completely uneducated on the topic by repeating this "contrails don't persist" GARBAGE.

By parroting that stupid chemtrail mantra, you are saying you do not believe in clouds. Nice one, SuZ. Now let's delete all the 'i believe' garbage and anecdotal tinfoiling... and look at what is left:

I just took a picture of a jet making an "S" shape next to chemtrails already in the grid pattern.

Oh? - so POST IT, along with location, date and time details. In other words, I call your bluff, so let's look at the evidence.

Someone on this site posted a video of a reporter on the street in LA

Would that be the Jeff Ferrell one - the guy who can't tell micro from milli? If not, please let me know which one, or just stop handwaving... do you EVER post actual information?

So don't characterize all of us as crackpots with tin foil hats.

Sorry, but sometimes the shoe fits *really* well...

Some of us are thoughtful, concerned and very angry. Everything always has a larger picture, a larger agenda. Know that and you see the actions of humanity a lot differently. And as an aside, if there really aren't people with an evil agenda, just try to get into the next Bilderberger Conference.

Yes, there is much evil in the world. So perhaps you should pick a GENUINE cause, instead of wasting your time seething over contrails and trying (but failing) to help the scammers push this idiocy.

reply to post by SuZQQQ


Lots of writing, and opinions there (likely colored by some visits to the so-called "chemtrail" fear-mongering sites on the Web) but, unfortunately, short on facts. You are dealing, here, with an airline pilot who has decades of experience.

Seems some clarification, and corrections, are in order:

Chemtrails generally appear around 10K feet...

Huh? Please show how these altitudes are determined. Because, this completely contradicts what the so-called "chemtrail" internet sites keep spouting.

... indicating the presence of compunds greater in density than water or dissipating jet fuel.

"compounds greater in density" than water? "dissipating jet fuel"?

Firstly, HOW is this jet fuel out there in the sky, to "dissipate"?

Secondly, quick question, and see if you can answer without using Google: Which is more dense, water or Jet-A?

Commercial jets fly in regulated routes...

Partially correct. However, it is a common misconception of laypeople.

There is no hard-and-fast rule that requires airplanes to remain on the Airways, whether the Jet Airways (above 18,000 feet) or the (mostly) VFR Airways down lower, the "Victor" Airways.

Flight plans are filed, and routing must be specific, for ATC purposes. BUT, once airborne, 'shortcuts' can be granted, with more direct routing.

For anyone truly interested in learning about the technical details of aviation navigational charts, here is a site to get started:

skyvector.com...

It is, unfortunately, limited to USA data. I looked to see if it has European charts, but found their 'blog' that answered the question. There is a copyright issue involved, as only the U.S. has freely-available charts...but stay tuned.

OK...let's get started. You may enter the ICAO four-letter code for the major airport nearest you. The ICAO code is usually the same three-letter IATA (airline) code you're used to, but with a "K" in front. Except for U.S. airports in Hawai'i and Alaska, wher you use a "P" (for pacific).

What will usually pop up first are the VFR charts. These are useful for locating landmarks near you, and orienting yourself. "Sectional", "WAC" and "TAC" charts all have different mileage scales, i.e., "One inch = X miles".

Every chart has a panel with a legend, if you scroll sideways, so the symbols can be interpreted. With that, you can educate yourselves(?) possibly, and always can, if you wish, seek out professional one-on-one instruction at your nearest smallish airport, where they have flight schools, and such. (Not free, however. Will cost you).

To become familiar with the higher altitudes, and the Jet Airways, you will click on the tab labeled "Enroute H-X", where the "H" denotes 'high', and the 'X' will be a corresponding chart number, for the region covered.

You can now augment your new-found knowledge with this site:

www.flightaware.com...

That is real-time, live ATC radar information of actual flights in progress.
Same codes, the four-letter ICAO, are used to access information.

(This site is also handy for those of you who wish to follow the progress of friends or family on THEIR flights....)

- they do not deviate...

Let's see, I think I already quashed that one. Airliners DO deviate. Multiple reasons. ATC-required traffic conflicts, pilot-requested (and granted) more direct routings, enroute, etc.

... and they do not fly for miles at an altitude below 10K ft.

Incorrect. Correct, for the most part, but there are exceptions---

Let me show you a typical STAR (Standard Terminal Arrival) plate from the FlightAware site.

This is the Williamsport One Arrival:



Just about every flight arriving Newark, from the West, is required to fly this Arrival Procedure. NOTE the "Expect to cross" comment at the SWEET intersection. Almost every time, ATC will issue the restriction, the requirement, to cross SWEET at 7,000 feet. Note how FAR that is, from Newark. This is a VERY inefficient Arrival procedure, in terms of fuel economy, but it is dictated by the incredible complexity of the airspace in the NYC area, and the three Major airports.

((---Adding, here....forgot to mention we joke about the "Williamsport" arrival, we call it the "OPEC arrival"....because it wastes so much fuel. Droning in at 7,000....then, we get a clearance to descend to 6,000. THEN a radar vector, headings, altitudes...constantly being 'jockeyed' in by the New York TRACON controller. Down to 5,000, more headings, more vectors. Then 4,000, finally by the time we're cleared to 3,000 we're approaching the Localizer, and a clearance for the approach is forthcoming. ALL the time, we're in the TAC, but still...it is less than safe, it is wasteful, this has nothing to do with "chemtrails", but I rant now and then...---))


Newark is the "third step-child", in a way, in the heirarchy of the other airports, Kennedy and La Guardia. THEY have more eficient arrival procedures.

BTW, I know of a LOT of pilots who live in the western New Jersey area near the Broadway VOR (BWZ). They certainly aren't concerned by the number of flights that constantly pass overhead. Because, they KNOW there is no such thing as "chemtrails"!

They do not fly for 50 miles then backtrack for another 50.

On what do you base this? I mean, WHO has seen airplanes flying for "50 miles", then 'backtracking'? Do you know how HARD it is to see an airliner from 50 miles away, with unaided humann eyes?

Consider that, when flying overhead at about 35,000 feet, the airplane is seven-eight miles away. HOW small is it, when you peer at it?

NOW... try to see the same sized vehicle from 50 miles??? Good luck.

They do not make curved patterns ...

Not entirely true. Airplanes DO turn, in flight. Gee, anyone who's ewver flown will realize this!

I just took a picture of a jet making an "S" shape next to chemtrails already in the grid pattern.

OK. 'S' shapes could be explained many ways. ATC instructions to deviate, for conflicting traffic reasons. Airliners also will deviate around weather systems, as necessary. And, "grid pattern"? Take a look, again, at the links above, and learn about the Airway system structure.

I have seen planes fly in tandem, side-by-side, same altitude, speed and distance - emitting their plumes for many miles.

Again, more layperson's inability to understand. It is impossible, just by "eyeballing", to determine the exact altitude of a jet overhead. You cannot tell the difference between 1,000, or 2,000 feet vertical separation.

Nowadays, most airliners (and private Business Jets) are RVSM certified, so the minimum separation is allowed to be 1,000 feet above FL 290, versus the older requirement of 2,000 feet some years ago (due to an abundance of caution, then, as to the accuracy of altimeter systems at the higher altitudes).

TWO flights, on same route, but different altitudes. EACH making a contrail. Simple, see it every day...

I have many times seen chemtrails appear with no accompanying aircraft -cloaked drones, perhaps?

OK, now that's just silly!

I have seen chemtrails appear during cloudless days in the summer after 5 days of 100+ temps but the preferred time is spring and fall on a nice light cloudy mix day.

Oh, dear....this is a recurring misunderstanding!

How often must it be repeated that the temperatures, and conditions, on the ground (at the surface) have no bearing whatsoever to conditions in the atmosphere above you?

I believe these plume emissions may contain many contaminants.

Ideas planted in you head directly form the so-called "chemtrail" websites...

Also, for the maraschino cherry on top, visit the Evergreen Airlines site and look under the "photo simulation" category.

OK. Well, I looked, didn't find the "photo simulation" category mentioned. Care to find a link for us?


Someone mention "tin foil hats"?



[edit on 20 April 2010 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SuZQQQ

 

Lots of writing, and opinions there (likely colored by some visits to the so-called "chemtrail" fear-mongering sites on the Web) but, unfortunately, short on facts. You are dealing, here, with an airline pilot who has decades of experience.

Sorry, you say you have lots of experience, but then I show videos of planes nearly colliding with each other, and you say nothing.

What is the separation limits for commercial passenger aircraft?

reply to post by 911stinks

What is the separation limits for commercial passenger aircraft?

In the body of my post above, but short answer.

Below 29,000 feet (FL 290) in U.S. airspace, in all cases, 1,000 feet vertical. Horizontal separation varies, depending on phase of flight.

THREE Statute miles, in Terminal area. FIVE minimum if a 'Heavy'.

At cruise altitudes, in ARTCC-controlled airspace, generally TWENTY miles, but various minima can be reduced if mutual "in sight" by each airplane's pilots.

In fact, ALL of these minima are based on not 'in sight', but visual confirmation relaxes the requirements.

Since the implementation of RVSM-certified onboard equipment the minimum vertical separation has been reduced to 1,000 feet when above FL290, versus the long-standard 2,000-foot minimum of old.

This has greatly increased the useability of airspace, and reduced many delays, and inefficient (not at best altitude for weight/vs. burn). Or, most efficient 'Long-range cruise' chart altitude, for weight. It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's enough for now....

Originally posted by 911stinks
Sorry, you say you have lots of experience, but then I show videos of planes nearly colliding with each other, and you say nothing.
What is the separation limits for commercial passenger aircraft?

He's given them. Now, would you be so kind as to point out the post of yours in this thread that shows 'videos of planes nearly colliding with each other'?

But before you do so, you might like to consider what the next questions will be, like - how did you determine they were nearly colliding?

And do you understand the science of photogrammetry? You might want to do a little research, because it might be about to bite you...

reply to post by CHRLZ


How about I put up the videos I put in another thread.







Oops, I just got warned by site owner about one line responses. Sorry.

Notice how all the close call planes are making Chemtrails? Notice how the plane in video one turns his trail on right before passing by other airliner?

[edit on 20-4-2010 by 911stinks]

reply to post by 911stinks


How about I put up the videos I put in another thread.




Yeah? So?

First of all, the video above has the wrong caption. The video is NOT being made from onboard a Boeing 737!!

(I can tell the difference).

Secondly, it looks to me as if they are on a North Atlantic crossing, and it is COMMON to see other traffic, in the opposite direction. Especially in the North Atlantic, it is the busiest area of Oceanic airspace in the World.

(When no volcanoes are erupting iin Iceland, anyways....)

For the NAT TRACKS (North Atlantic Tracks), as I've mentioned, it is RVSM airspace, and only airplanes (and crews, which account for ALL airline crews) certified to operate in RVSM airspace can conduct operations.

THIS brings the minimum separation standards to 1,000 feet, above FL290, as I've already pointed out.

The general 'rule' is, for aviation altitude selection, is Eastbound is 'odd', and westbound is 'even.

THAT is....from the USA to Europe, for instance, the usable Flight Levels Eastbound are FL290, FL310, FL330, etc. Converse for the other direction.

HOWEVER, when it comes to the NAT tracks, some can be "one-way", depending on time of day. In that case, we are assighed Flight Levels at 1,000-foot intervals.

BEFORE RVSM implementation standards, the NAT tracks were severely limited in traffic potential. In terms of 'opposite' traffic.

BUT....MOST North Atlantic traffic tends ot go ONE way at one time in the day, and the OTHER way in the other times. Traditionally.

MOST flights, from North America to Europe, over the North Atlantic, depart in the late afternoon, early evening, as do MOST westbound flights from Europe, back to North America.

There are, of course, OTHER flights scheduled that go against this normalcy.

This is NOT rocket science, it is well-known, and easily researched. At least, I think it's easy to research? Maybe not, which is why I have to educate people?





[edit on 20 April 2010 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by 911stinks
How about I put up the videos I put in another thread.

Wow, great! In future, how about you don't refer to stuff that wasn't there, and maybe even apologise when you do, for wasting our time looking?

1st video...
In the description it clarifies that there was no near miss. No rules were broken, and it was simply a close, but safe overflight. If you are making some point, can you please elaborate and be precise? (see below)

2nd video...
Another close but perfectly safe overflight. Do you not fly much? Again, be specific and say exactly what is wrong and why? What point are you making???

3rd video...
Again, same questions. What on earth is your point? That you don't know the safe separation distances?

And what exactly does any of that have to do with the topic at hand?



Aha... I note your added text - at LAST, a 'claim'..


Yes, I saw the variation in contrails, which beautifully illustrates that the aircraft is flying through boundary conditions for contrail formation. And it also shows that it can only be a few hundred feet between conducive and non-conducive conditions. (I'll put a fairly sizable bet on the fact that the jet was climbing slightly, and moving into colder, more saturated air though some shear zones. You'll notice that the first 'spurts' dissipate very rapidly, as do the ones in the third video - chemtrails don't do that, remember?

Now if you think REALLY HARD about all this you will realise that this 'boundary' effect is why most cirrus clouds start out very wispy.. and also why all clouds have...

wait for it..

EDGES. And are often found in...

THIN LAYERS.

Or do you think a better explanation is that he was flicking his little chemtrail switch on and off really fast, or that his equipment was malfunctioning, but he left it going anyway?


Gee, which one is more likely?

reply to post by 911stinks

Notice how all the close call planes are making Chemtrails? Notice how the plane in video one turns his trail on right before passing by other airliner?

Huh?

Wow, THIS is how you interpret normal, everyday cockpit videos taken from inside actual airliners, in everyday operations???


I have, it seems, WAY too much experience to convey properly just why your perceptions are incorrect.

Not sure how to get through, any more. The level of ignorance is devastating. (At times...)

Not much more to say, at this point.





[edit on 20 April 2010 by weedwhacker]

If the atmosphere is super saturated (and it often is at 20-35k), the output of a jet engine (mostly water vapour and some combustion products) will cause trails that not only last, but will grow into fully fledged cirrus clouds.

Propoganda - you know these are not cirrus clouds. I can have planes travelling all year at various altitudes and there are no cirrus clouds appearing afterwards. These are consistently planes at lower altitudes, well below atmospheric conditions. Many leave plumes that have a yellow tinge that by evening has overcast the sky. One thing I will tell you, I will not find chemtrails when it is a very windy day - it's the only time we get to see blue sky.

Hint - if you want to push chemtrails, DON'T prove yourself to be completely uneducated on the topic by repeating this "contrails don't persist" GARBAGE.

Contrails cannot persist as their heat source is transitory. Clouds however are generated by the colder atmospheric conditions meeting with the heat rising from the earth. If that were the case why wouldn't steam from a tea kettle produce a lingering water vapor if the air temp in the kitchen was, say, 35 degrees?

I just took a picture of a jet making an "S" shape next to chemtrails already in the grid pattern.
Oh? - so POST IT, along with location, date and time details. In other words, I call your bluff, so let's look at the evidence.

Well, I will as soon as I can download it from my cellphone. I have a funky Tracfone and the clarity is not the best as it was around midday, about 1-2 weeks ago, taken from my car, and the sun was in my eyes but you can make out the chemtrail - I'll get that to ya! I wish I had it on video as I watched it being made - not just the after-effect. I've got lots but they are standard photos and I don't have a scanner - I do this just for my own personal record, not to validate to the unbelievers. I'll let them find out on their own.

Someone on this site posted a video of a reporter on the street in LA
Would that be the Jeff Ferrell one - the guy who can't tell micro from milli? If not, please let me know which one, or just stop handwaving... do you EVER post actual information?

Go to around page 4-5 on this thread.

Yes, there is much evil in the world. So perhaps you should pick a GENUINE cause, instead of wasting your time seething over contrails and trying (but failing) to help the scammers push this idiocy.

I am not seething, but I do flip a bird to the heavens every now and then when I see them doing their dirty work.

My theory is - GO BIG - see the bigger picture. Chemtrails are part of the greater cause - just a component. I reiterate, there are groups out there on a global scale that desire to reduce the planetary population. In some respects, I don't blame them, but the means they are using is disconcerting at the least, tragic at its worst.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Well, Mr. Airline Pilot, you do know your stuff! Commercial airline stuff, that is. Yes, it's fine and dandy you can give me vectors, and altitudes, and flight paths, and on and on and on...But I could have saved you the expenditure of energy. You are referring to the world of commercial airlines. Unless you have been or are operating in a black ops military capacity or at the behest of one of the New World Order organizations, I doubt you would waste your time on this website. Why the ferocity of your position? The average American cares not a whit about chemtrails, they do not see them or desire to know why or what they are. And TPTB are counting on just that - hide in plain sight.

Go back to the Evergreen Airlines website and this time look carefully - the image is there for all to see. Again, hide in plain sight.

As I told CHRLZ in a post reply, I see the bigger picture at work. Chemtrails are but a component. I am a card-carrying and proud conspiracy believer. Since time began there is someone with an agenda to benefit their cause. But this is a global cause - the major players are getting older now and are on the fasttrack to implement as much as possible before - pick your natural or manufactured doomsday scenario - occurs. But really, take the blinders off and open your eyes to the real possibilities of what certain segments of humanity - if we can call them that - are capable of. Or are you one already? I stand by my position as I know it to be my truth.

reply to post by SuZQQQ


I asked already, and if you don't know how to link, just say so...

Go back to the Evergreen Airlines website and this time look carefully...

IF you wanted me (or anyone else) to see what you're trying to focus on...then you'd give better directions, yes?

As to the rest of your diatribe, sorry you didn't (it seems) bother to learn.

Instead, you hand-waved away, and competely ignored the fact that "chemtrails" (so-called) do NOT occur at 10,000 feet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNLESS you're talking about cloud-seeding.

But, of course, seeding happens IN clouds, so you won't likely see it happening, unless it rains on you afterwards....still, you see the AFTER-EFFECTS...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THAT part is totally laughable, and any pilot will also laugh at it.

So, what's next?

More nonsense?



[edit on 20 April 2010 by weedwhacker]

[edit on 20 April 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker


On the Evergreen Airlines website there is a "Supertanker" category which contains an Image Gallery. The 2nd photo under "Photo Simulations". Oh, and they have drones too now, I see.

I'm a military brat - child of a flightline CMSGT. I love military craft, especially uber-fast ones, that is why my all-time favorite is the SR-71 Blackbird. I have travelled many miles for aerial and even static displays. Remember the Skunkworks days of super-secret aircraft development, the U2 debacle in the early 60's? The Stealth fighter and bomber? And now we have speculation of the "cloaked" Aurora craft, although my personal belief is we are waaaaay beyond that even. Chemtrails and the purveyors of such nastiness - a primitive but effective tool for a particular agenda. Especially when there are those out there who must decry their existence and rail on the believers. We're believers for a reason and it surely ain't for our health. Hack, hack...

reply to post by weedwhacker


Yup, I don't know how to link - yet. I don't invest a lot of time on this site -but sometimes you know-it-alls just tweak my medulla and I have to respond. Self-confessed simpleton though I am.

Like most men who are very adept at quoting baseball stats from the 1930's - your brain is cluttered with non-essentials. So you're Mr. Technical - in the grand scheme it will all be for naught. Your kind of negativity is just what "THEY" are counting on.

Originally posted by SuZQQQ

If the atmosphere is super saturated (and it often is at 20-35k), the output of a jet engine (mostly water vapour and some combustion products) will cause trails that not only last, but will grow into fully fledged cirrus clouds.

Propoganda - you know these are not cirrus clouds.

Having worked in the meteorology field, I know only too well that they ARE cirrus clouds. Do you understand the fairly simple relationship between altitude, temperature and water/ice vapour concentrations? Spend some quality time doing research. Start with the search phrase "cirrus cloud formation", and look for credible sites (the first ten or so you'll get at Google are just fine..)

Then after you have learnt the conditions required, and what things 'start' cloud formation, go the UWYO site here:
weather.uwyo.edu...
Pick a few sites, and then take a look at what happens as you ascend past say 7,000 meters up (that's about 23,000ft) - taking particular note of the range between about 8000m and 12000m - look at the numbers for temperature, relative humidity and dewpoint (you might need to look those terms up too, I'm guessing). See if you can pick the regions where cirrus clouds are likely. Go on, bravely try LEARNING something.

I can have planes travelling all year at various altitudes and there are no cirrus clouds appearing afterwards.

So, all you have to do to prove your point is give the details. Where, when, what direction, plus pictures. Then we can identify the flights, determine the REAL height and condtions at that height, and tell you if contrails should have formed and for roughly how long.

In fact, you could do it YOURSELF. So what excuse do you have? The only ones I can think of are LAZINESS, or the fact that YOU KNOW WHAT THE RESULT WILL BE and you don't want anyone spoiling your fantasy..

These are consistently planes at lower altitudes, well below atmospheric conditions.

PROVE IT and stop the continual handwaving.

Many leave plumes that have a yellow tinge that by evening has overcast the sky.

You're kidding...??? Things get yellowish towards the horizon??? NOOooOOoo. You mean like the Sun does, like stars do, like clouds do at sunset??? What an observer we have here!!!

One thing I will tell you, I will not find chemtrails when it is a very windy day - it's the only time we get to see blue sky.

Is your hand getting tired yet? Wind conditions at ground level have little or NOTHING to do with conditions at 20Kft and up. Go talk to a meteorologist. Or even just climb a large hill...

Contrails cannot persist as their heat source is transitory.

1. It takes a very short time for the rapidly expanding (that is an IMPORTANT issue - look it up..) exhaust from a jet engine to be cooled by the surrounding atmosphere. Less than a second, in fact...
2. Jet engines output quite massive amounts of water vapour (after all they are breathing a lot in at the front..)
3. When water vapour cools to below freezing point - voila - ice crystals.
4. If the conditions are right (remember UWYO above???) then that stuff HAS to persist and/or develop into cloud formations.

You have two choices - either do the research and learn stuff (and then come back and apologise), or stay uneducated and live in your deluded fantasy.

Clouds however are generated by the colder atmospheric conditions meeting with the heat rising from the earth.

.. and they will only form...? When the conditions are right.

If that were the case why wouldn't steam from a tea kettle produce a lingering water vapor if the air temp in the kitchen was, say, 35 degrees?

How many times do we have to state the obvious?????? It doesn't produce a long lasting cloud for the same reason that there usually aren't clouds in your back yard...

THE CONDITIONS AREN'T RIGHT. But let's keep going with your little thought experiment. Try doing that outside on a very cold foggy morning. Gee, guess what happens - the vapour DOES linger... Same as you can breathe out 'clouds' in those conditions. Do you seriously not notice this stuff?

Look, here's a picture of a car doing contrails in those conditions (just like your kettle would):
Car contrailing..
It's even possible to see aircraft contrails at ground level (- yes, if the conditions are right..) although you have to get pretty near the poles to match what are quite normal conditions at 30,000ft...
Ground level contrails

Oh? - so POST IT, along with location, date and time details. In other words, I call your bluff, so let's look at the evidence.
Well, I will as soon as I can download it from my cellphone. I have a funky Tracfone and the clarity is not the best as it was around midday, about 1-2 weeks ago, taken from my car, and the sun was in my eyes but you can make out the chemtrail - I'll get that to ya!

Please include the date and time info, plus the location and direction you shot the image, and the direction the aircraft was flying. If nothing else, at least give a rough location.

I wish I had it on video as I watched it being made - not just the after-effect.

The 'after effect' will be fine, as long as you can come up with the rest of the info. I won't be doing a technical critique on the camera/lens quality, tempting as it might be...

I've got lots but they are standard photos and I don't have a scanner - I do this just for my own personal record, not to validate to the unbelievers. I'll let them find out on their own.

Well, who wouldn't take everything you say at face value.. After all, you have well-shown your knowledge of clouds....

Someone on this site posted a video of a reporter on the street in LA...
Go to around page 4-5 on this thread.

So, we should go do your work for you? Nope.
You ARE lazy. If you make a claim YOU need to back it up. Maybe in your little circle you can get away with this sort of handwaving, but here, it doesn't fly.

If the trails are just water vapor, why do the contrails (Chemtrails) only show up on infrared radar, and not the water vapor radar?

Thank you for bringing us to the mind of a brilliant man (G. Edward Griffin). His hesitancy to expound on what is behind the chem trails speaks volumes of the ultimate goal of the source. If I am mistaken this is another tool being used by the international elitist to lessen the world population. If I am off track please inform me. A flag for your informative post, keep it coming.

Originally posted by 911stinks
If the trails are just water vapor, why do the contrails (Chemtrails) only show up on infrared radar, and not the water vapor radar?

What makes you say that? Can you give an example of a 'water vapor radar' image that should show contrails, but doesn't?

reply to post by CHRLZ


Good morning Sir CHRLZ! Well, I scanned your yada-yada post and all I see is the same minutiae blather similar to that put forth by dickwhacker, er, weedwhacker. You guys are high on the details in your areas of expertise but so limited in the greater picture. In your case, perhaps it has something to do with the HAARP facility in your neck of the woods beaming off the chemtrails blasting over Oz. But maybe you don't get so many chemmies in your location so we'll call it simple ignorance.

I live near the SF Bay Area and have been observing chemtrails for over 10 years. I have taken photos, as stated for my own use, although some I have taken are better than what I see on many sites. Any photos I have taken were of trails at a very low altitude, some right above my house! And any photogarapher or someone good at gauging distance could easily tell these trails are at or below, maybe lower, than 10K feet. Please come off your diatribe about cloud formation at 30K feet, water vapor, heat exhaust, ad infinitum -YES, I GET IT - you know the technical!!!!!!!! So release your prosthetic balls from their cumulative knot and simmer down. It always amazes that the most vociferous, the most venom-spewing ideologues still gravitate to a topic that in their addled hearts must know to have some truth, some validity to it. Or why would you persist in your disclaimers?

This bores me - you bore me. I know the truth and I am secure in that knowledge. Nuff said. G'day.

PS - there's a gazillion websites out there on the topic of chemtrails - far more detailed, more articulate than I and with photos too! Have at it.

Originally posted by SuZQQQ
Good morning Sir CHRLZ! Well, I scanned your yada-yada post and all I see is the same minutiae blather similar to that put forth by dickwhacker, er, weedwhacker.

Do you think that approach will impress anyone and garner credibility?
Have you heard of the phrase Ad Hominem?

You guys are high on the details in your areas of expertise but so limited in the greater picture.

So if we are.. er... WRONG .. why don't you point out exactly where, instead of insulting and handwaving? This, like your other posts, is an information-free zone, I see...

In your case, perhaps it has something to do with the HAARP facility in your neck of the woods beaming off the chemtrails blasting over Oz.

Which one is that, and what exactly does it do?

Or may I suggest (using the same level of evidence) it might be an attack by huge alien mutant flying steam kettles.

I'm leanin' to the kettles, I'll have you know.

But maybe you don't get so many chemmies in your location so we'll call it simple ignorance.

Oh, bravo! That one really sums up your mind set beautifully.

I live near the SF Bay Area and have been observing chemtrails for over 10 years. I have taken photos, as stated for my own use

So this is all just a worthless anecdote then. But thanks for playing.

although some I have taken are better than what I see on many sites.

But we're not ever going to see those because of course we are not worthy... And you have nothing to prove... Yes, we've heard it before.

Any photos I have taken were of trails at a very low altitude, some right above my house!

OhMiWord, look ---- it's another low-flying anecdote!!

And any photogarapher or someone good at gauging distance could easily tell these trails are at or below, maybe lower, than 10K feet.

Which makes it a great pity that no-one of that ilk was around.
Hey, idea!!!
Maybe you should expand your circle of friends a little?

Please come off your diatribe about cloud formation at 30K feet, water vapor, heat exhaust, ad infinitum -YES, I GET IT - you know the technical!!!!!!!!

So now that you know WHY we want something other than lame, unsupported garbage showing aircraft that are probably flying at exactly the heights that WOULD create contrails, why don't YOU post something else?

You know, something USEFUL and VERIFIABLE.

So release your prosthetic balls from their cumulative knot and simmer down.

I'm not the one flinging insults, and I'll let the dear reader decide who is 'simmering'..

It always amazes that the most vociferous, the most venom-spewing ideologues still gravitate to a topic that in their addled hearts must know to have some truth, some validity to it. Or why would you persist in your disclaimers?

It's simple. I don't like seeing people afraid of hoaxes. I don't like the scammers or delusionals like Clifford Carnicom, Will Thomas or Nancy Lieder, Jaime Maussan, Jose Escamilla, ad infinitum who deliberately try to terrify people with stupidity.

I find it truly sad when I see people like you taken in by it. People desperate to blame something for their woes or illnesses, desperate to be amongst the few who know "The Truth"...

... when in fact they have simply been suckered.

I like to see efforts to change the world directed to where they are most useful. I like to fight conspiracies that are real. This isn't one of them.

This bores me - you bore me. I know the truth and I am secure in that knowledge. Nuff said. G'day.

So I'm guessin' that means we aren't going to be seeing the promised smoking gun images off your phone then, hey SuZ?

PS - there's a gazillion websites out there on the topic of chemtrails

Oh. I guess it must be true then - you found it on the interweb!! Well done.