Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering aka "Chemtrails" DEBUNK THIS !!!!

Hello all ATS readers and members. I am back now after being temporarily post banned for mistakes I made in posting to another thread. Because I did not put proper external tags and I repeat posted a few videos which is considered "spamming". I would now like to post a quote from my most recent comments that I made in a different thread on the issue of "chemtrails".

This quote below is a statement coming directly from one of the companies that makes fuel for air planes and jets used by our government, the military and some private corporations. They openly and out right admit that they are putting industrial toxic waste into the fuel supply. They state that they first discovered this technique while trying to find a way to dispose of 2.7 million gallons of napalm left over from the Vietnam war. The expenses normally involved in disposing of industrial toxic waste are usually quite large. There are numerous government regulations that need to be followed when normally disposing of these toxic chemicals. As well as political, environmental and public relations issues. They can easily avoid these costs and issues by using the techniques explained on their website.
This is the companies website homepage

www.battelle.org...

This is the source file of the quote made by Battelle on their company brochure.

www.battelle.org...

Battelle scientists at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory led a cooperative effort to eliminate Department of Defense stockpiles of napalm from the Vietnam War. After three other contractors failed Battelle provided a solution that overcame safety and environmental concerns political sensitivities and public scrutiny that had followed the project since its inception. Our process not only disposed of more than 2.7 million gallons of the dangerous substance on schedule and with an outstanding safety record it also recycled the napalm and blended it with other industrial waste products to make a specification fuel with exceptionally high thermal energy value.

They can now use this technique to dispose of more and more industrial toxic waste. And since the fuel is only being used in government, military and some private/corporate jets. It would be very hard to get access to samples of the fuel for testing. In addition to the fact that the fuel additives are privately patented and the ingredients are classified as top secret. If they ever were to get caught and the public found out those ingredients, the official story would most likely be that they are being used in tests for the geo-engineering programs.

There are numerous other companies both corporate and private who are involved with geo-engineering and many other governments and industrial military complexes. Some of which probably have no knowledge about the ( my opinion "unnecessary" ) toxic waste being added along with the many other ingredients, such as chemical polymers and solid metal particulate matter being used in the special jet fuel.

The exceptionally high thermal energy value is a very likely reason that these contrails persist the way they do. The material in the exhaust takes much longer to cool off. It means that the fuel is less likely to be affected by normal flight conditions such as heat and is less likely to break down molecularly before it is used. When this fuel is used and burned it has a much higher temperature rating than normal jet fuel. It has about 100x greater thermal stability and is called the "JP8+100 effect" by people in the aviation industry.

Here is a .PDF document from the Australian Governments Department of Defense that explains the JP8+100 effect.

www.dtic.mil...

I have many other documents in .PDF form and they are available to anyone online. I found them during my investigations and are a matter of public record. These companies and the government must disclose some of the things by law. So they use very difficult scientific wording and vague descriptions as well as using acronyms in their reports. This helps in the prevention of understanding and their attempt to disguise what they are actually saying.

Please do not believe the people trying to tell you that these "persistent contrails " are normal. It is a very new phenomenon and even NASA admits that not much is known about them and has asked for public assistance in keeping track of these in the past. They actually have asked school children to record them. Anyone who tells you that there is scientific proof thats easily explains what these "persistent contrails" are is lying. The real actual scientific studies done on "persistent contrails" are very few and far between. They have not been done by non-biased independent labs and scientists and there is no agreed upon conclusions about them. Especially when subject to peer review by other scientists studying this phenomenon.

I will continue to try and release the knowledge and information I have found thus far. I admit that none of it proves in any conclusive way what is being done or for what reason. I only suggest that you investigate this issue more yourself and do not the word of anyone trying to tell you that they are harmless. Even normal exhaust from any vehicle is not harmless. That is a well known fact. So just think about it, investigate it and decide for yourself. I am going to try my best to put the information that I have so far into the other threads. When I have gone through and edited down the content and determined a clearer way to present said information.
Thank you.

Here is a video with the ex-FBI chief Ted Gunderson talking about chemtrails


This is Part 1of a 5 part video series that has a radio interview with an ex-CIA member talking about chemtrails


I can't seem to get these last two videos to post here properly so I put the YT links.

Here is a video of an interview with the pop star Prince speaking about chemtrails
www.youtube.com...

Finally I would like to give you a link to another YT video that has some valuable information on chemtrails and shows some of the investigation work done by a television news station.
www.youtube.com...

I would like to share another video showing a few comparisons of normal contrails and other non-normal contrails suspected of being "chemtrails" It also expresses some of the concerns about "chemtrails".


Next is a video is from the Feb. 20, 2010 meeting of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) This was one of three meetings held to discuss geo-engineering techniques. In this video they talk about using aluminum oxide particles as a method for preventing the radiant effects of the Sun to prevent global warming.

This is a video with scientists speaking about trying to get funding for atmospheric aerosol geo-engineering aka "chemtrails" They also talk about other potential uses for it when the ideas were developed.

In this next video the techniques of "cloud-seeding" for geo-engineering are explained



Some of the patents for road salts that are used in snowy conditions are being altered to be used in geo-engineering experiments. These salts help simulate the aerosols of the ocean during experiments and are suspected to be the source for the high levels of barium being found by people all over the world.

The following quote is from a .PDF document that is available at www.sciencedirect.com... it is titled... PA_fueladditive_cirrus.pdf ....It talks about fuel additives, contrails and cirrus clouds.

Are fuel additives a viable contrail mitigation option?
By: Klaus Gierens
Institut fu¨ r Physik der Atmospha¨ re, Deutsches Zentrum fu¨ r Luft- und Raumfahrt, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Received 8 January 2007; received in revised form 9 March 2007; accepted 13 March 2007

Fuel additives have been proposed as a potential mitigation option for contrails. They could change the thermodynamic conditions necessary for contrail formation in a way that makes contrail formation more difficult than with standard kerosene fuel. Here I show how additives could affect contrail formation, and I conclude that fuel additives are not a useful way to avoid contrails. Introduction Contrails and contrail cirrus are currently thought to have the greatest share in aviation’s impact on the radiative forcing of the atmosphere and on climate

Hmm? Says trying to use fuel additives to make contrail formation less likely is not useful idea. Therefore I think it is safe to conclude that using fuel additives must makes contrails more likely..

This next quote is from the website below and it talks about the chemistry and composition of clouds over a populated area with poor and polluted air quality.

www.sciencedirect.com...

Cloud residues and interstitial aerosols from non-precipitating clouds over an industrial and urban area in northern China
China Weather Modification Office of Shanxi Province, Taiyuan, Shanxi 030032, China Received 2 December 2010; revised 11 February 2011; accepted 16 February 2011. Available online 26 February 2011. Abstract

Most studies of aerosol-cloud interactions have been conducted in remote locations; few have investigated the characterization of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) over highly polluted urban and industrial areas. The present work, based on samples collected at Mt. Tai, a site in northern China affected by nearby urban and industrial air pollutant emissions, illuminates CCN properties in a polluted atmosphere. High-resolution transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was used to obtain the size, composition, and mixing state of individual cloud residues and interstitial aerosols. Most of the cloud residues displayed distinct rims which were found to consist of soluble organic matter (OM). Nearly all (91.7%) cloud residues were attributed to sulfate-related salts (the remainder was mostly coarse crustal dust particles with nitrate coatings). Half the salt particles were internally mixed with two or more refractory particles (e.g., soot, fly ash, crustal dust, CaSO4, and OM). A comparison between cloud residues and interstitial particles shows that the former contained more salts and were of larger particle size than the latter. In addition, a somewhat high number scavenging ratio of 0.54 was observed during cloud formation. Therefore, the mixtures of salts with OMs account for most of the cloud-nucleating ability of the entire aerosol population in the polluted air of northern China. We advocate that both size and composition – the two influential, controlling factors for aerosol activation – should be built into all regional climate models of China.

Hmmm? No mention of aluminum or barium in their test samples of polluted clouds. There must not have been enough of those particles found to mention. I wonder why there aren't any trace amounts of those metals being found in the clouds over China.

Next I would like to show that there are studies being done utilizing the altering of the atmospheric chemistry.
This is a quote found on the website below
www.sciencedirect.com...

An examination of sensitivity of WRF/Chem predictions to physical parameterizations, horizontal grid spacing, and nesting options

An accurate representation of meteorological processes is important to the accurate predictions of meteorology and air quality. In this study, the Weather Research and Forecasting model with Chemistry (WRF/Chem) is utilized to examine the sensitivity of air quality predictions to two planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes and three land-surface models (LSMs). Model simulations with different PBL schemes and LSMs are conducted over the Houston–Galveston area for a 5-day summer episode from the 2000 Texas Air Quality Study (TexAQS-2000). Sensitivity to horizontal grid spacing (12 vs. 4 km) and nesting methods (1- or 2-way) is also studied. Model predictions are evaluated with available surface and aircraft observations. Both meteorological and chemical predictions at the surface and aloft show stronger sensitivity to LSMs than to the PBL schemes. The model predictions also show a stronger sensitivity to horizontal grid spacing using 1-way nesting than 2-way nesting and to the nesting method at 4 km than 12 km. The benefits (or disbenefits) of using more complex meteorological schemes, finer horizontal grid spacing, and more sophisticated 2-way nesting may vary and must be evaluated for specific episodes. The results from this study also indicate a need to refine model treatments at a fine grid spacing and the current 2-way nesting method used in WRF/Chem for improvement of model performance.

The next quote is from the website www.sciencedirect.com... It is from a study about the amount of dangerous heavy metals found in suspended particulate matter ( air near the ocean ) of a coastal Industrial town

Assessment of heavy metal content in suspended particulate matter of coastal industrial town

Mithapur, Gujarat, India Purchase $ 31.50 Shaik Basha, a, , Jayaraj Jhalaa, Ravi Thorata, Sangita Goela, Rohit Trivedia, Kunal Shaha, Gopalakrishnan Menona, Premsingh Gaura, Kalpana H. Modya and Bhavanath Jhaa a Discipline of Marine Biotechnology and Ecology, Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), G B Marg, Bhavnagar – 364002, Gujarat, India Received 20 June 2009; revised 7 April 2010; accepted 20 April 2010. Available online 28 April 2010
.
Abstract Heavy metal concentrations in suspended particulate matter (SPM) were investigated for their distribution and source in the atmosphere of coastal industrial town, Mithapur, Gujarat, India. SPM, at 10 locations covering three seasons, were trapped on glass fibre filters using high volume samplers and quantification of metals (Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb and Zn) was done using Atomic Absorption Spectrometry employing HNO3 based wet digestion. Results show relatively low concentrations of SPM (211.3 to 375.2 μg/m3) compared to National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), specified By Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB, India), however, they were 2–3 times higher as compared to reference site. Among the heavy metals Cr, Mn and Pb levels were low, while Ni and Cd found to be exceeding the USEPA standards. The metal levels were also compared with those reported for other rural, coastal, industrial and urban parts around the world. Enrichment Factor analysis indicated that Cd, Zn, Cu, Pb and Ni were highly enriched relative to their crustal ratios (to Fe) and correspond to substantial contribution of anthropogenic source of these metals. The source identification was carried out by principal component analysis by applying a Varimax Rotated Component Matrix.

Hmmm? So they found the metals that exceeded the normal standards were most likely there due to man made sources. Too bad that they didn't study aluminum Al or barium Ba. I wonder why. Could it be that those metals are not commonly found in nature? Why yes, I do believe that is exactly the reason why.

en.wikipedia.org...
Barium ( /ˈbɛəriəm/ BAIR-ee-əm) is a chemical element with the symbol Ba and atomic number 56. It is the fifth element in Group 2, a soft silvery metallic alkaline earth metal. Barium is never found in nature in its pure form due to its reactivity with air. Its oxide is historically known as baryta but it reacts with water and carbon dioxide and is not found as a mineral. The most common naturally occurring minerals are the very insoluble barium sulfate, BaSO4 (barite), and barium carbonate, BaCO3 (witherite).
Aluminium (UK i /ˌæljʉˈmɪniəm/ AL-ew-MIN-ee-əm)[4] or aluminum (US i /əˈluːmɪnəm/ ə-LOO-mi-nəm) is a silvery white member of the boron group of chemical elements. It has the symbol Al and its atomic number is 13. It is not soluble in water under normal circumstances. Aluminium is the most abundant metal in the Earth's crust, and the third most abundant element, after oxygen and silicon. It makes up about 8% by weight of the Earth's solid surface. Aluminium is too reactive chemically to occur in nature as a free metal. Instead, it is found combined in over 270 different minerals.[5] The chief source of aluminium is bauxite ore.

Hmmm? So neither barium or aluminum are found to occur in nature in there pure form, interesting.

This is what usually happens to someone who pollutes the air with aluminum.

From an article found at
eponline.com...

Aluminum Production Facility to Pay $2 Million for Air Pollution Violations

Aug 01, 2007
The federal government has reached a settlement with the state of Indiana, the city of Hammond, Ind., and Jupiter Aluminum Corp., the operator of a secondary aluminum production facility in Hammond, which resolves Clean Air Act violations arising from the operations of the facility.
Under the consent decree filed on Aug. 10, Jupiter agreed to take steps to ensure future compliance with certain provisions of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). Jupiter also will pay a civil penalty of $2 million, which will be shared between the federal government and the Hammond Department of Environmental Management (HDEM).
On Aug. 9, the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) filed a complaint alleging that Jupiter violated the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), applicable to aluminum recyclers that recycle painted or coated aluminum scrap, which became effective in early 2003. Such "secondary aluminum production facilities" can emit hazardous air pollutants during their operations, including dioxin, furans, hydrochloric acid and particulate matter containing hazardous metals. The complaint and settlement with Jupiter is the first to be brought in federal court to enforce the NESHAP regulations applicable to secondary aluminum production facilities

Here is a website with lots of information about geoengineering

www.geoengineer.org...

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
reply to post by firepilot

 

Instead of saying, in effect, a Cessna 152 is too small, let's quantify. How much too small?
Let's get down to the job of designing an aircraft to fit the mission profile that fits witness statements.
WEIGHT CARRYING CAPACITY. Photos show trails that are about the same size as one half of one horizontal stabilizer on a Boeing 757. Full span of the horizontal stab on a 757 is 49'. So we have a trail 12.5' in diameter. So the cross section area is 6.25^2 * pi, or 123 square feet, or 11.4 square meters. Witnesses describe trails that go from horizon to horizon. Line of sight from 40,000' is 265 miles each way, or 530 miles, or 853,000 meters. So the volume of the trail is 9,724,000 cubic meters. To get enough opacity to be clearly visable from 40,000' away, you would need on the order of 20% by volume of the sprayed substance. Since most claim it's aluminum (Al), let's use that. So you need 1,944,800 cubic meters of aerosolized Al. For ease of doing this stuff in my head, let's round to 2 million m^3. Since density is given in grams/cubic centimeter, we multiply 2.8 g/cm^3 times the volume of the Al and get 5,600,000 grams or 56,000 kg. Now pictures of "chemtrails" often show four trails being left, so to leave 4 visable trails of Al from horizon to horizon, you would need to haul 224,000 kg. Since cost is always an object in aircraft design, we would like to use something already flying as a starting point. Oh-Oh - big problem. Nothing flying today can haul that payload. A 757 maxes out at 114,000 kg. The C-5, although much bigger, is limited to 118,000 kg. The king of the heavy lifters, the Russian Antanov An-124, can go a hefty 136,000 kg. Houston, we have a problem.
SIZE. We need to carry 8 million cubic meters of the stuff. That is, if the particles are compressed to a solid, a block measuring 200 meters on each side. Drat! Another problem. the 757 interior is only 36 meters long and 3.5 meters wide. And we need an aircraft cabin 200 meters long and 200 meters wide. Maybe we should talk to the Russians. Nope, no help there. The Antanov cabin is only 36 meters long.
WING LOADING. To be able to fly and not have the wings fall off, we need to keep wing loading, that is the total weight of the beast divided by the wing area, at about the 700 kg/m^2 level. The 757 is 661 kg/m^2. If the empty aircraft is really light, let's say it can carry its own weight, and the only thing I've ever flown that could do that was the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, gross weight would be about 450,000 kg, so we need about 650 square meters of wing area. In order to operate at altitude we will need an aspect ratio (span/chord) length of 8 or so. So we use the formula 8x*x=650, and see that we need a wing span of 200 meters and a chord of 25 meters. Holy embiggenate Batman! That's 600 feet plus change. That's four 757s wingtip to wingtip. Or maybe I should say winglet to winglet if we're talking the 757-200WL or 757-300 aircraft.
Has anybody noticed a 600 foot long, 1200 foot wide(including cabin) and 600 foot tall behemoth cruising the friendly skies?
Now, how many Cessna 152s would it take to make 1 trail from horizon to horizon, as described above? The standard useful load of a 152, including the weight of the pilot and any fuel carried on board, is about 230 kg. Assume a puny 60 kg pilot. A 152 can't carry enough fuel to go 530 miles, so that makes the mission an impossibility. But let's go as far as we can spewing aerosolized aluminum, so assume full fuel of 24.5 gallons at 6 pounds per gallon. That's another 67 kg of our useful load gone. So we can carry 103 kg of chemtrail stuff. Oops, I forgot about the weight of the chemtrail delivery system. Wouldn't that be under "C" in the yellow pages? Hmmm, not there. I can't find any for sale on the internet, so we have to imagine such a system of aerosolizers, tanks, tubes, nozzles, manifolds, etc. It would have to weigh 80 kg. So now we're needing 12,000 152s for our secret squirrel 152 chemtrail fleet.
So, we'll run out and buy 12,000 Cessna 152s. Oh-oh, Cessna only made 7,584 152s and doesn't make them any more. en.wikipedia.org...
There's another little problem. The service ceiling of a 152 is 14,700 feet. I think people would notice a fleet of twelve thousand little spam can airplanes flying around that low.

Living an empirically based reality is such a buzz kill.

Was that a bad attempt at humour or are you for real?

Lets look at a few examples of just how rediculous your argument is given that it does not allow for any possibility of chemical reactions.

1. Have you ever seen something burn? How much smoke was generated compared to the size of the fuel?
2. Have you ever seen/used a fog machine at a concert or in a nightclub? Have you seen how much smoke/fog a small 1ltre bottle of dry ice/glycol can create?
3. Have you ever seen a plane skywriting? Was the plane an Airbus A380 (which would apparently still be too small based on your mathematical theory)
4. Ever been to an airshow or maybe seen the redbull air race. Not exactly Russian Antinovs are they but can certainly manage alot of smoke.
5. Given that you don't allow for any of chemical reaction because apparently any visible trail could only exist with a dispersant to trail ratio of 1 to 1, I can only assume that you must therefore deny the existence of any form of 'normal contrail' as well? Correct?

Think about it, you are trying to argue that there is no plane in existence big enough to carry enough material to manufacture a long visible trail whilst at the same time accepting that a plane, without any help or additional dispersant, can create a contrail across the sky through a natural...phenomenon?magic?voodoo?...or chemical reaction?

I would not be holding my breath waiting to receive the next Einstein Science Award if I was you.

Originally posted by firepilot
Yes, but some people would rather live life in a fantasy world where all these single engine training planes owned by Universities for aviation programs, are actually part of a super sekrit chemtrail fleet. Hmm wonder how they keep all those college students quiet and not talking about the secret chemtrail gear on those Cessna 152s. Maybe they changed those engines with jets since a Cessna 152/172 is going to struggle to get above 10,000 ft.

edit on 7-3-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)

Nah, that wouldn't work either, since the 152 uses a NACA 2412 airfoil at the root transitioning to a NACA 0012 at the tip and such a cambered asymetrical wing just won't fly at 300-400 mb levels. You would need something like a semi-symetrical 23xxx series or a NASA HSNLF-0213 series. And if you stuck a Cessna CitationJet engine on a 152, you'de have a little fuel problem. The Williams FJ44, while not a fuel hog like the pure jets it replaced, still has a pretty hefty specific fuel consumption. At takeoff power, it will burn 1150 pounds/hour. Since the 152 wings only holds 24 gallons, that means the engine wll run for 8 minutes before going *poof* from fuel starvation. That won't get you off the ramp and to the runway. Another problem in getting off the ground would be the CG issues resulting from adding a 484 pound engine forward of the datum.
But it might be fun watching 12,000 Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Cessna 152s taxiing in formation spraying stuff on I-95 for a couple of miles.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


Oh, geeze....you're back, and flooding again???

First, the post at top of this page.....I will get to your MANY misconceptions, and outright nutty "connections" (that are all wrong) regarding "batelle" and PNL later....but first!

The videos >sigh< Ted Gunderson is a loony tunes, over-the-hill crackpot. We have covered HIM, and that video, in another thread already. He has ZERO CREDIBILTY, and every claim he has made RE: "chem"-trails shown to be false. He is a joke.

Speaking of jokes, the next video....THAT one is covered as well (why don't you try to EDUCATE yourself better?? During your "exile" you had plenty of opportunity to read all of the threads that have already torn apart the YouTube videos...each and every one of them that make "chem"-trail claims is bunk!!).

Now....you only posted URL links, but you mentioned ANOTHER joke (a trifecta!!) in the one that has, of all people, "Prince", the celebrity, flappig his lips about "chem"-trails??? Are you flipping serious???

OK...at this point, there seems to be a diminishing return on investment, to attempt to engage and impart some reason and rationality to you.....I feel sad that you are lost in such delusions, and unable to see it for the ridiculous paranoid fantasy that it truly is........

There are many theories about the effects that these "chemtrails" are having on us and on the environment. One of them is that strange spiderweb like material has been showing up in peoples yards and also being found elsewhere. Some people suspect that theyare coming from the "chemtrails". Some people also suspect that it is causing outbreaks of a skin conditon called Morgellons disease. en.wikipedia.org... Morgellons disease is sometimes referred to as unexplained dermopathy or unexplained skin condition/disorder. People with Morgellons disease sometimes suffer from a condition known as Delusional parasitosis. This is the belief that they are infected by an invisible parasite. I would like to share an article and some videos regarding this strange and mysterious aspect of the "chemtrail" controversy.

Here is a quote from an article about this mysterious disease
Source: www.voltairenet.org...

Biological warfare? Mystery Disease Linked to Vanished Israeli Scientist

by Hank P. Albarelli Jr.* The recent outbreak of a life-threatening disease in the United States, caused by a new and exotic strain of a hypervirulent fungus, is baffling the US media and the scientific community. Speculations point to climate change as a possible explanation. However, according to journalist Hank P. Albarelli Jr., famous for having uncovered the 1951 CIA experiments with '___' in Pont St. Esprit (France), the answer is more likely to be found inside the Fort Detrick biological warfare center and in Israeli laboratories.

Here is a clip from the TV show "The Doctors" talking about this strange condition

Here is a video from CNN investigating the strange fibers that are suspected of causing Morgellons Disease


Here is a man who found some of the strange spiderweb like material in his yard and now his dog has been acting very sick and he believes that he has Morgellons disease.


Here is a video of some backyard scientists who believe they have discovered what might be causing the Morgellons disease. They say it is from two pathogens called Arthrobotrys oligospora and Aspergillus niger

Finally here is a video clip from "Nightline" on the ABC network discussing Morgellons
Part 1
Part 2

reply to post by Seagle


I didn't want to take up a lot of space by quoting your entire post but I'll hit some of the points. No, I have never seen a Skybus 380 skywrite but I personally have done skywriting for Pepsi in a Travel Air aircraft. And I have flown in airshows where smoke is used. And if you really had a clue, you wouldn't have used those examples. For an airshow, my Sukhoi 26 would carry 8 gallons of smoke oil, which is a lightweight Corvis (TM) type oil. It would last 4 minutes. That would, at normal cruise power, make a trai labout 12m miles long. The oil is sprayed by an electric pump through an atomizing nozzle into the exhaust stacks where it combusts in an oxygen environment. That's a far cry from putting out 4 trails for 560 miles at a distance from the observer of 8 miles, where to be visible to the human eye it has to subtend an apparent angle of more than an arc minute, as opposed to an airshow altitude of a couple of hundred feet.
With a "chemtrail, all the material must be carried in the aircraft. With a contrail, on the other hand, only the lightest portion, the hydrogen, has to be carried. The much heavier oxygen component of water vapor is already there. In addition, there is also the ambient moisture, in the form of supercooled water vapor, just waiting for a perturbation to flash freeze it into ice crystals. I'm sure you've seen the videos of the supercooled water in a bottle which is liquid until it is shaken, whereupon it flash freezes.
What you are engaging in is the typical "trailer" action of responding to scientific fact with totally irrelevant questions, like "Yeah, but haven't you ever seen a pink hippo in a neon green tutu dancing?" "See, that proves chemtrails exist."
The question that should be asked is, "Have you ever seen 240,000 kilograms of aerosolized aluminum before?" Or, "Have you ever seen an airplane with a wingspan of 600 feet?"

reply to post by weedwhacker

OK weedwhacker the first thing I have to say to you is prove it.

I don't believe a word you say. Your statements are the only thing that I can say without a doubt have "ZERO CREDIBILITY" The joke is that you think you can sit there and decree that you know it all and everyone else is paranoid, delusional and ridiculous. You spout off your totally baseless claims and opinions when I have real scientific evidence and credible people to back it up. Who the heck are you? Why should I believe a word you say ? What are your motives ? You can go ahead and say whatever you like , how about proving what you have said? How about you prove what you have said to the exact same standards that you want other people to prove "chemtrails". Show me some credible evidence based on facts gathered by professional non-biased studies that are backed up with reliable sources and are agreed upon by peer review as to their validity.

Edit: Try going to my public online database file on live.com where I have all the pdf documents and read the reports by all the scientific and government agencies. As well as some of the publicly released corporate material. Tell me how all those documents are all already debunked and proven to be a hoax...LOL

Good luck and go ahead try to DEBUNK THIS

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
...With a "chemtrail, all the material must be carried in the aircraft. With a contrail, on the other hand, only the lightest portion, the hydrogen, has to be carried. The much heavier oxygen component of water vapor is already there. In addition, there is also the ambient moisture, in the form of supercooled water vapor, just waiting for a perturbation to flash freeze it into ice crystals...

Hmmm. That's an interesting point that I never really considered (although I know this to be true, but never thought of it this way). If I understand you correctly, you are pointing out that most of the material that is in a regular contrail is already up there in the sky...

...i.e., the oxygen being sucked in by the engines for combustion is combining with the hydrogen in the jet fuel and results in a water vapor contrail -- PLUS some of that trail is compressed water vapor that was already existing in the atmosphere.

reply to post by weedwhacker

OK weedwhacker here is your chance to DEBUNK THIS.

First give me the links to the other threads you mentioned that as you claim have already proven the items I posted to be "bunk".

Second let's start with your claim that Ted Gunderson is a loony tunes, over the hill crackpot

post by weedwhacker
>sigh< Ted Gunderson is a loony tunes, over-the-hill crackpot. We have covered HIM, and that video, in another thread already. He has ZERO CREDIBILTY, and every claim he has made RE: "chem"-trails shown to be false. He is a joke.

Show me the psychiatric reports that support your claims and also any other evidence you wish to submit that back up your statements about Mr. Gunderson

Are any of you familiar with any of the information regarding the

Communication / Navigation
Outage Forecasting System (C/NOFS)
Science Plan
The C/NOFS Science Definition Team,
(O. de La Beaujardière, Editor)
AIR FORCE

3.2.4 Role of Penetration Electric Fields
An important source of electric fields lies in the interplanetary medium. Through merging between the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) and the Earth’s field, a potential difference ΔΦPC is imposed on the polar cap ionosphere. This potential is also imposed on the magnetosphere and the global ionosphere. Nishida [1968] demonstrated that currents flowing in the equatorial ionosphere are affected by intensifications of the interplanetary electric field (IEF). Intensifications of ΔΦPC increase the dawn to dusk electric field EY throughout the magnetosphere. This electric field causes energetic ions in the inner magnetosphere to gain kinetic energy and convect toward the Earth. As a result, the different gradient-curvature drift paths of ions and electrons begin to separate. If high values of ΔΦPC are sustained for more than an hour, space charge builds up to shield EY from the innermost parts of the magnetosphere. In addition, the intensity of the ring current grows. magnetometers at low altitudes on Earth detect decreases in the north-south component of the local magnetic field. Traces of the Dst index plotted as a function of time show positive slopes when the intensity of the ring current is increasing, and negative slopes when it is decreasing. Thus, negative slopes in Dst, dDst/dt < 0 may be regarded as a simple identifier of times when the IEF is imposing a dawn-to-dusk electric field in the inner magnetosphere, earthward of the existing ring current. Is dDst/dt a reliable index of incomplete shielding of the solar wind electric field, and can it be used to forecast irregularities?


This report has been reviewed by the ESC Public Affairs Office (PA) and is releasable to
the National Technical Information Service (NTIS).

Hey weedwhacker if you are unfamiliar with any of this information why don't you go into "exile" for a little while and "EDUCATE" yourself.

The C/NOFS satellite is scheduled to be launched in January 2004 into a low inclination (13o), low altitude elliptical orbit (~400 x 700 km). The satellite instruments include: • Planar Langmuir Probe (PLP) • Vector Electric Field Instrument (VEFI) • Ion Velocity Meter (IVM) • Neutral Wind Meter (NWM) • GPS dual-frequency receiver (CORISS) • Coherent radio beacon (CERTO) C/NOFS ground-based instruments include SCINDA scintillation receivers as well as GPS receivers to measure TEC and L-Band scintillation. In addition, data from other ground-based instruments such as optical instruments, ionosondes, FPIs, and radars will complement the mission. The mission profile calls for an initial time in Survey Mode to develop, test, and validate the algorithms, and a second period in Forecast Mode, during which part of the satellite data will be acquired in real time in order to generate specification and forecast maps of the global ionosphere and scintillation levels. The equatorial aeronomy scientific investigations will take place during both Survey and Forecast Modes. The scientific objectives fall into three categories: 1. Understand the physics of the ionospheric plasma in the equatorial regions. The goal is to specify and forecast the background ionosphere accurately. This implies that the ionospheric drivers – ionospheric as well as thermospheric parameters – need to be specified and forecast. 2. Understand the physical processes that lead to the formation of plasma irregularities in the ionosphere, and identify the mechanisms that trigger or inhibit plasma instability. This goal requires accurate modeling of the parameters that are part of the instability growth rate. The electric field, whether of dynamo or magnetospheric origin, is one of the most important of these parameters. This goal also entails physics-based modeling of plasma bubbles and their time evolution. 3. Characterize ionospheric plasma irregularities and model the propagation of radio waves through the ionosphere in order to estimate the phase and amplitude scintillation for various propagation geometries. This goal requires an understanding of the irregularity spectra and the cascading processes, and the construction of appropriate phase screens. One of the innovative features of C/NOFS is that most of the scientific effort will be directed towards forecasting. An attempt will be made to forecast ionospheric and plasma irregularities parameters as far as 6 or even 12 hours ahead. The science objectives cannot be met by using the satellite data alone. Theory and modeling are also required, as well as other satellite and ground-based observations. Synchronized efforts using many instruments, coordinated campaigns, theory, and data analysis are essential.

Here now we're getting into the more relevant parts

10 Observation Campaigns
Observation campaigns are either coordinated with specific ground-based instruments or associated with rocket flights.
10.1 Ground-based Campaigns
Two major campaigns will be carried out in the first eight months. Quite naturally, one will be centered in the 75o West longitude sector where considerable instrumentation already exists. A four-month effort from January through April 2004 will capture the height of the spread-F season as it declines toward equinox in that sector. A key element in this campaign is the instrumentation cluster centered at JRO. Concerted efforts must be made jointly by the AF, NSF, and NASA to assure adequate support for this instrument set, in addition to those described below. A suitable model is the Thermosphere, Ionosphere, Mesosphere, Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) mission which pioneered such cooperation. Key orbits will be those that pass over Jicamarca at ~1700 LT which will reveal the electric field structure characterizing the terminator as it races westward. The goal is to predict the severity of that night’s activity, and then to measure that activity using the instrument suite. Equally important will be the ability to check whether the electrical structure of the terminator retains its character as it sweeps over and is observed by JROThis sector should also be invaluable for testing whether simple instruments can predict events locally prior to sunset. The most promising in this regard are daytime airglow or TEC measurements of the ratio of anomaly plasma content to the equatorial content. The daytime airglow method of predicting activity has been tested in India with some success. To our knowledge the TEC method has not yet been tried using GPS although it has been proposed for the mid-Pacific sector [J. Makela, personal communication, 2001].
A second campaign will center on the mid- to west-Pacific region, from Hawaii to Indonesia. A well developed suite of instruments already exists including Altair, many airglow images, ionosondes, and GPS receivers. One or more coherent scatter radars, which can give information on the electrical structure at the equator as well as measurements of equatorial F-region irregularities, will be necessary. As noted above, Hawaii is also instrumented to observe the equatorial zone using airglow cameras looking southward and may contribute to predictions for the western Pacific. It is anticipated that Christmas Island will also be well instrumented.

10.2 Rocket Campaigns One of the chief limitations of the C/NOFS satellite in situ data is that they represent a one-dimensional, W-E cut through the equatorial ionosphere. CORISS can make occultation measurements to obtain vertical profiles of electron density at points spaced by ~16° in longitude around the orbit. However, data on the vertical profiles of ion drift, electric fields, density irregularities, and neutral winds are unavailable. The scintillation monitoring ground sites incorporated into C/NOFS do not obtain vertical profile information. Radars, including ionosondes, coherent scatter, and incoherent scatter, certainly provide vertical profile information but not necessarily at the resolution desired (e.g., for density irregularities) or even for all desired parameters (e.g., thermospheric neutral winds). In order to investigate the vertical profiles of neutral winds and the vertical structure of density irregularities it may be desirable to establish sounding rocket campaigns. Many coordinated rocket and radar studies of ESF have been carried out in Brazil, Peru, Kwajalein, and India [e.g., Kelley et al.,

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
reply to post by Seagle

 

I didn't want to take up a lot of space by quoting your entire post but I'll hit some of the points. No, I have never seen a Skybus 380 skywrite but I personally have done skywriting for Pepsi in a Travel Air aircraft. And I have flown in airshows where smoke is used. And if you really had a clue, you wouldn't have used those examples. For an airshow, my Sukhoi 26 would carry 8 gallons of smoke oil, which is a lightweight Corvis (TM) type oil. It would last 4 minutes. That would, at normal cruise power, make a trai labout 12m miles long. The oil is sprayed by an electric pump through an atomizing nozzle into the exhaust stacks where it combusts in an oxygen environment. That's a far cry from putting out 4 trails for 560 miles at a distance from the observer of 8 miles, where to be visible to the human eye it has to subtend an apparent angle of more than an arc minute, as opposed to an airshow altitude of a couple of hundred feet.
With a "chemtrail, all the material must be carried in the aircraft. With a contrail, on the other hand, only the lightest portion, the hydrogen, has to be carried. The much heavier oxygen component of water vapor is already there. In addition, there is also the ambient moisture, in the form of supercooled water vapor, just waiting for a perturbation to flash freeze it into ice crystals. I'm sure you've seen the videos of the supercooled water in a bottle which is liquid until it is shaken, whereupon it flash freezes.
What you are engaging in is the typical "trailer" action of responding to scientific fact with totally irrelevant questions, like "Yeah, but haven't you ever seen a pink hippo in a neon green tutu dancing?" "See, that proves chemtrails exist."
The question that should be asked is, "Have you ever seen 240,000 kilograms of aerosolized aluminum before?" Or, "Have you ever seen an airplane with a wingspan of 600 feet?"

"With a chemtrail, all the material must be carried in the aircraft. With a contrail, on the other hand, only the lightest portion, the hydrogen, has to be carried."

So this revelation is a Scientific Fact correct?

Please tell me when this was proven and where I can find reference to this scientific fact so that I can call the media. Everyone needs to know that the debate is now over and Chemtrails do exist and are clearly defined.

As for the rest of your post, its pointless engaging in further debate with you. At no point have I mentioned aerosolised aluminium and was discussing weather modification and the FACT that it does not require a large aircraft to manufacture a trail across the sky. I specifically said that US universities own around 700 aircraft, mainly single engine Cessnas and regardless of what you want to believe i assure you that they are used in weather modification. For you information, some aluminum products are key ingredients used in the petrochemical industry and so traces of aluminum are always present in jet exhaust plumes.

Here is a little video that will show how a small plane doesn't require a mass of material to create a chemtrail.

weather modification

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
...With a "chemtrail, all the material must be carried in the aircraft. With a contrail, on the other hand, only the lightest portion, the hydrogen, has to be carried. The much heavier oxygen component of water vapor is already there. In addition, there is also the ambient moisture, in the form of supercooled water vapor, just waiting for a perturbation to flash freeze it into ice crystals...

Hmmm. That's an interesting point that I never really considered (although I know this to be true, but never thought of it this way). If I understand you correctly, you are pointing out that most of the material that is in a regular contrail is already up there in the sky...

...i.e., the oxygen being sucked in by the engines for combustion is combining with the hydrogen in the jet fuel and results in a water vapor contrail -- PLUS some of that trail is compressed water vapor that was already existing in the atmosphere.

edit on 3/8/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

If you were one of my students, I'd give you an A. The burning of jet fuel is an oxidation reduction reaction between dudocane, a 12 carbon hydrocarbon chain reacting with oxygen. The reaction is written as 2C12H26 + 3702 ----> 24C02 + 26H20. That means that for every 2 molecules of jet fuel (dudocane) pumped into the combustion section of the engine, 37 molecules of oxygen is sucked out of the air and burned, producing24 molecules of gaseous carbon dioxide and 26 molecules of water, as water vapor.
A Boeing 747-400, a common passenger carrying jumbo can carry 57,285 gallons of jet fuel. That is right at 382,000 pounds. The molar mass of dudocane is 170.34, so there are 2.7 moles of jet fuel in a pound. So a 747-400 can carry jut a hair over a million moles of jet fuel. Since for every 2 moles of jet fuel it takes 37 moles of oxygen, 18 and one-half million moles of oxygen is burned. The molar mass of diatomic oxygen is 32g/mole. So 1,305,000 pounds of oxygen is extracted from the atmosphere andt doesn't have to be carried aloft by an aircraft producing contrails.
There is no jet aircraft ever made that can carry a 1.6 million pound payload. Contrails are possible only because the whole weight of the contrail doesn't have to be carried.
Now some people who are science-challenged might argue, "Well maybe it's aluminum that is being burned instead of the hydrogen in the fuel" The problem is that aluminum is 27 times heavier than hydrogen per mole so the weight of aluminum that would have to be carried would be in the millions of pounds. But then they might argue, "Yeah, but haven't you ever seen an airplane made out of aluminum fly?" "That proves chemtrails."

reply to post by Seagle

Good post Seagle. He's also forgetting that there are different kinds of "chemtrail" aerosols. There are the sulfur based, salt based, aluminum oxide and nano-based models. I would be purely speculating if I mentioned the biotech and toxic waste based types.

Furthermore, the nightside GUVI and SSUSI measurements of the 135.6 nm atmospheric emissions can be used to detect large and small-scale depletions in the ionosphere (see Figure 30). Ionospheric irregularities can be seen as small (6-10 km) enhancements or depletions in the intensity observed in the equatorial ionosphere emissions. Plasma depletions are observed as a reduction of as much as 80% in the observed intensity. The GUVI experiment is able to build up a global map of the distribution of these depletions. The depletions can then be compared to individual C/NOFS passes

Here's what the nano/biotech version might "hypothetically" look like

Now this is all just a hoax by CNN and the doctors right weedwhacker ?
Sorry wrong video before this is the computer simulated nano version

So enough with the highly "speculative aspects" and back to more realistic documentation

9.2.3 Ground-Based Daytime Optical Airglow Studies An instrument called HIRISE (High Resolution Imaging Spectrograph using Echelle grating) was developed at Boston University to measure daytime airglow emissions. HIRISE is a slit spectrograph capable of making all-sky measurements [Chakrabarti, 1998; Pallamraju et al., 2002]. HIRISE measurements have already resolved controversies surrounding the "Ring effect" or filling-in of solar Fraunhofer lines [Pallamraju et al., 2000]. High-latitude observations of OI 630.0 nm red line emissions resulted in the identification of a sunlit auroral arc, corroborated by a concurrently operating incoherent scatter radar [Pallamraju et al., 2001a]. The instrument also measured OI 630.0 nm emissions from the sunlit cusp [Pallamraju et al., 2001b]. Furthermore, daytime red line airglow measurements in Chile demonstrated that dayglow emissions could be used to investigate ionospheric phenomena such as the Appleton anomaly and various waves characteristic of low latitudes. These features show day-to-day variability that correlates with the occurrence/absence of ESF [Chakrabarti et al., 2001]. Thus, HIRISE is capable of identifying ESF precursors in the daytime airglow, which is critical for successful scintillation forecasts. HIRISE is currently being augmented with multi-wavelength capability. Simultaneous, all-sky images at OI 557.7 and 777.4 nm will augment those at 630.0 nm. Such measurements will shed more light on the altitude variability of upper-atmospheric phenomena and will provide data critical for a comprehensive understanding of ESF.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


The trouble is, you're "realistic documentation is apparently (can't tell for sure since you neither attributed the paper nor sourced it)a paper having to do with quenching rate coefficients of O^+2 by O and N2 in the thermosphere. It has nothing to do with trail formation in the troposphere and lower stratosphere. The thermosphere begins at 250,000 feet and continues to the beginning of the exosphere. The International Space Station is in the thermosphere, as are the auroras.
Which leads one to ask, "Why quote a long passage from a totally irrelevant scientific work unless it is to hope that people will be so befuddled that they will just assume erudition. It is exactly the same as quoting Schrodinger's wave equation and then saying, "And what do you say about that evidence for chemtrails?"
Now I don't think you intentionally tried to mislead. I never attribute to evil that which can be fully explained by ignorance.

Why all the studies of plasma and the ionosphere? Hmm?

Maybe because of things like this
Project Aurora flying triangle

Hypersonic X-43A Scram Jet

Aurora hypersonic contrails


The studies involve all of Earth troposphere, stratosphere,etc, etc...

I did attribute the quote here it is once again
Communication / Navigation
Outage Forecasting System (C/NOFS)
Science Plan
The C/NOFS Science Definition Team,
(O. de La Beaujardière, Editor)
AIR FORCE

The scientific objectives fall into three categories: 1. Understand the physics of the ionospheric plasma in the equatorial regions. The goal is to specify and forecast the background ionosphere accurately. This implies that the ionospheric drivers – ionospheric as well as thermospheric parameters – need to be specified and forecast. 2. Understand the physical processes that lead to the formation of plasma irregularities in the ionosphere, and identify the mechanisms that trigger or inhibit plasma instability. This goal requires accurate modeling of the parameters that are part of the instability growth rate. The electric field, whether of dynamo or magnetospheric origin, is one of the most important of these parameters. This goal also entails physics-based modeling of plasma bubbles and their time evolution. 3. Characterize ionospheric plasma irregularities and model the propagation of radio waves through the ionosphere in order to estimate the phase and amplitude scintillation for various propagation geometries. This goal requires an understanding of the irregularity spectra and the cascading processes, and the construction of appropriate phase screens.