Chemtrail Debunkers....

reply to post by logistix111

You cannot keep that big of a secret when that many people are involved.

Beyond the issue of whether they are real or not the answer to this part is: Yes you can. That's why most things that require a high level of kept secrecy are highly compartmentalized with only a handful of people knowing the full truth.

reply to post by coyotepoet


that theory might work well with some things, but since you can't show even 1 such "compartment" exists it remains pure speculation.

And I'd be interested to see how you would construct a hypothetical compartmentalisation for aircraft fuel systems that deal in "chemtail" materials vs those that don't.

Here's what you hae to deal with - technical expertise in the airline industry.

From people who handle the fuel, to those who overhaul the fuel sytems to those who measure the reliability of the components that make it up - you have to account for differences in handling, performance, lubricity, weight, and calorific content.

You have to persuade the refuelers that there's nothing odd about only refeuling aircraft from company (or companies) "X" from tank "y", and all others from tank z.

You have to ensure those who design the pumps, the nozzles account for any differences in fuel performance, without them knowing why.

you have to ensure the aircraft engine manufacturers have appropriate performance characteristics for their engines - temperature margins, thrust values - that all match "non-modified" ones or else you have to explain the differences.

Pilots shifting between companies need to be persuaded that different values for the per\formance characteristics of the same aircraft are not actually important.....

I know believers hate being told how the real world works, but honestly it does seem that you have little or no idea as to the complexity of the airline industry - the analysis, the penny pinching, the performance targets, the reliability requirements that are part of every single day's operation by even small airlines.

You think that all you have to do is say "oh well of course it is compartmentalised" and hey presto - therefore such a thing exists.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

that theory might work well with some things, but since you can't show even 1 such "compartment" exists it remains pure speculation. And I'd be interested to see how you would construct a hypothetical compartmentalisation for aircraft fuel systems that deal in "chemtail" materials vs those that don't.

Like I said, I was just speaking in generality, not about trails specifically. However, all of your arguments seem to be based on the supposition that they are coming from a broad variety of airplanes, including commercial aircraft and whatever it is that is being sprayed is mixed into the fuel. That may be what some "chemmies" argue, but that is never the way that I saw it. Chemtrails as I see the phenomenon come from a fleet of even 4-5 planes based in a particular area (San Fran has their set of planes, Phoenix has their set of planes, etc). It really wouldn't take that many to cover a broad area if all they did was fly a circuit back and forth every few hours around their base cities. Whatever is being sprayed is not coming from the fuel at all but from nozzles hooked into barrels of whatever within the plane. Obviously I have no "proof" for my ideas, but this is the only thing that really makes sense to me, not fuel or any number of aircraft because then, your arguments are valid, it would be too hard to cover that up. However, in my idea of how it works, you would only need a handful of pilots and a small segment of any airport, public or private. It would be very easy to compartmentalize that kind of system. Especially if you had a cadre of one or two mechanics for each fleet that were in on it.

reply to post by coyotepoet


Fair enuf - and I appreciate that you are speculating on how such a system might work.

But then why are there days without 'trails? If there were a/c "based" in an area they shuold be fairly easy to spot - they still have to have seperate fuel handling, or something else different, to account for the 'trails viz a/c that don't leave them.

And why don't the 'trails show up at ground level & intermediate heights??

whichever way you spin chemtrails there are always really obvious questions (at least obvious to me & others) that crop up - and to cover tehm "you"(in a generic sense) have to suppose more and more elaborations to explain them.

plus of course there's so many 'trail theories that what sounds "reasonable" for one doesn't work for others....

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

I appreciate that you are speculating on how such a system might work.

And despite our occasional head-butts I appreciate that you are coming from the perspective of someone with much more experience in aviation than I.

But then why are there days without 'trails? If there were a/c "based" in an area they shuold be fairly easy to spot - they still have to have seperate fuel handling,

Those would be the days when no spraying was scheduled. Even on those days I see contrails from planes that fly by, they are just shorter, hang around for a minute or so, and don't spread out across the sky or create a cloud cover. As for the second part, I would imagine that they would have a self-contained area where they could do everything they needed to do without being seen by someone who would recognize the differences in the planes. For this reason I lean more toward the idea of private airports rather than something like San Fran Intl or Sky Harbor.

And why don't the 'trails show up at ground level & intermediate heights??

Because they wouldn't turn on whatever it was they were spraying until they got up to a certain altitude.

whichever way you spin chemtrails there are always really obvious questions (at least obvious to me & others) that crop up - and to cover tehm "you"(in a generic sense) have to suppose more and more elaborations to explain them. plus of course there's so many 'trail theories that what sounds "reasonable" for one doesn't work for others....

On this we agree. I think that is part of the reason this gets so obfuscated with each side convinced they are right There are many theories by "chemmies" as to what is going on and why, as well as the hows. And the debunkers do for the most part make logical and valid scientific arguments that refute a lot of the "chemmies" arguments. Because one side doesn't fully understand or agree on the whats and whys and the other side has logical arguments against a lot of the whys each person is convinced they are right and it makes sense to them because it is "reasonable" for them.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

whichever way you spin chemtrails there are always really obvious questions (at least obvious to me & others) that crop up - and to cover tehm "you"(in a generic sense) have to suppose more and more elaborations to explain them. plus of course there's so many 'trail theories that what sounds "reasonable" for one doesn't work for others....

Yeah, at least the debunkers have one solid line that they tow, the "chemmies" have a number of lines, which I admit doesn't help our credibility on this issue in the long run.

My head hurts after reading the 1st 20 pages. >_<
I havent made up my mind if Chemtrails is a legitimate conspiracy or not.

From my experiences I have seen 4-5 contrails in the sky and they disapate very quickly.
I have also seen 4-5 contrails in unusual grid formations block out the sky completely in a grey/brown haze after a crystal clear day.

I believe it is more than possible that Chemtrails can exsist. I am also no expert on this matter so I accept that it is also readily possible for Chemtrails not to exsist.

While the acidemic evidence points to no conspiracy that is not neccecarily a great reason to just start trusting the government with whatever they say. I would not put it above the government to spray harmful chemicals into the atmosphere.

One thing that upsets me a little is how insulted some people get when chemtrails are brought up. Why is this such a sensitive issue?

reply to post by TheKnave

One thing that upsets me a little is how insulted some people get when chemtrails are brought up. Why is this such a sensitive issue?

Because they feel it is pointless as it has been scientifically "proven" that all trails are contrails and feel that any talk of chemtrails is hoax or ignorance. At least that is what is said. I notice that too and have wondered the same thing. Maybe they feel that they are denying ignorance and get frustrated with what they feel is continued ignorance.

This article has some good info and links

enjoyingthejourney.blogspot.com...

Chemtrail Content Analysis from Different Sources The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the USA has rejected offers to analyze chemtrail samples from Dr. Len Horowitz, while in Northern Idaho, and researcher Clifford Carnicom of Santa Fe, NM. But they and concerned citizens in Las Vegas, NV, Mt. Shasta, CA, and Eastern Arkansas, all managed to get independent laboratory analysis done on samples from soil, water, and the air.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a9ce3d76f534.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/42826f30e697.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
This article has some good info and links

enjoyingthejourney.blogspot.com...

Chemtrail Content Analysis from Different Sources The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the USA has rejected offers to analyze chemtrail samples from Dr. Len Horowitz, while in Northern Idaho, and researcher Clifford Carnicom of Santa Fe, NM. But they and concerned citizens in Las Vegas, NV, Mt. Shasta, CA, and Eastern Arkansas, all managed to get independent laboratory analysis done on samples from soil, water, and the air.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a9ce3d76f534.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/42826f30e697.jpg[/atsimg]

So, posting another chemmies blog, somehow makes their opinions into evidence? I should post the from the educate-yourself site regarding sylphs eating chemtrails, or orbs piloted by reptilians, will that make those into evidence?

You are just back to throwing anything up, that you think supports your feelings. You still do not seem to realize that you will have aluminum, barium and most anything present in the ground will also be in dust too

One thing that upsets me a little is how insulted some people get when chemtrails are brought up. Why is this such a sensitive issue?

I have wondered the same thing, and what I have noticed is that many of the people who feel so passionately that "chemtrails" don't exist are pilots and people with expertise in the aviation industry. I think this issue hits such a nerve with them because it hits to the core of their integrity and life's work, more than likely most pilots have no part in what I believe is geo-engeneering "field" testing. The pilots involved are probably military and/or private pilots, and have been ordered or paid to do a job, and I'm sure they are on a need to know basis, and are just good people that have been convinced they are doing no harm, and maybe even helping to save the world, who knows?

Being in the horticulture/flower business most of my adult life it absolutely hurts me to the core knowing now how evil Monsanto is......and the harm they are causing to the human race and the earth.... to think that I have used and sold their products over the years makes me cringe. I can only say that now that I know better I try and use my expertise to try and teach people alternatives, and help them understand why it is so important to change the thinking in my industry, not always popular with my peers, because if they really find out what's happening, discuss it and finally accept it, it means they have to change.

We need the pilots expertise and insight on this issue, we know your good people, we put our lives in your hands everyday. I would urge any folks that are involved in the aviation industry to help us figure out what is going on from their perspective....keep an open mind to the possibility something wrong is happening here.....blow the whistle if called for....no shame in that...seems the right thing to do.....

reply to post by firepilot


My post also referenced to the EPA's response to Clifford Carnicom asking about chemtrails.
www.carnicom.com...

How the EPA Answered Clifford Carnicom's Concerns About Chemtrails...
www.netowne.com...

reply to post by MountainLaurel

I have wondered the same thing, and what I have noticed is that many of the people who feel so passionately that "chemtrails" don't exist are pilots and people with expertise in the aviation industry. I think this issue hits such a nerve with them because it hits to the core of their integrity and life's work, more than likely most pilots have no part in what I believe is geo-engeneering "field" testing. The pilots involved are probably military and/or private pilots, and have been ordered or paid to do a job, and I'm sure they are on a need to know basis, and are just good people that have been convinced they are doing no harm, and maybe even helping to save the world, who knows?

This is the most compassionate, and perhaps accurate take on the issue that I have read to this point. Well done.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew

How the EPA Answered Clifford Carnicom's Concerns About Chemtrails...

That is funny when did pesticides for crop dusting turn into chemtrails, because that link for the EPA has nothing to do with chemtrails? Please show us where this letter is about chemtrails?

By now we've probably all seen the 1991 patent owned by the Raytheon Corp. titled "Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming". Thanks to this ATS members thread. As well as articles from other investigative websites.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's a newer patent I recently found titled
United States Patent Application 20100127224
Atmospheric injection of reflective aerosol for mitigating global warming

www.freepatentsonline.com...

A method is provided for mitigating global warming. In such method, fine particles can be injected or dispersed into the stratosphere. The particles can be characterized by relatively low emissivity in the visible spectrum and relatively high emissivity at thermal infrared wavelengths. In a particular embodiment, the fine particles can consist predominantly of silica. In a particular embodiment, the fine silica particles can include diatomaceous earth (DE), which may or may not be heat treated before injection and dispersal within the stratosphere. In one embodiment, the fine silica particles can include at least one of silica fume, fumed silica, or powdered quartz. The fine silica particles may have an average diameter ranging between 5 nanometers and 100 microns.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


Uh huh.

As before.....these are PATENTED IDEAS>

Inventions to "possibly" be implemented.....and, the point of the patent, really, is economical......IF someone, someday chooses to use your IDEA, and build it, and use it.....then THEY have to pay royalties to the original inventor, and "patent holder".....

This is blatantly obvious.

So, POINT????

So, basically the OP is saying he wants a thread where he doesnt have to deal with people aggressively questioning their findings based on hard evidence?

Isn' that about as counter to scientific inquiry as one can get/?

www.youtube.com...

No clue if this is legit, but interesting nonetheless lol

reply to post by McKey


Chaff dispersal is definitely another possible method planes could use to make certain kinds of chemtrails. Here's some of the info I found.

www.af.mil...

The amount of chaff released worldwide by all of the services is approximately 500 tons per year. Chaff falls to the earth at a settling velocity of approximately 30 cm per second. Atmospheric residence times range from 10 minutes for the majority of chaff released at 100 m to approximately 10 hours for chaff released at 10,000 feet. Chaff fibers experience little breakup before reaching the ground.

Smart Chaff
www.raytheon.com...

One idea that emerged was the notion of an electronic, fog-like material that could be dispersed into a giant plume and used to degrade the ability of enemy radar to detect aircraft. The concept is similar to the old idea of deploying clouds of metallic chaff that would reflect radar signals and generate false echoes. This “chaff” would be different — scavenging energy from sunlight and enemy radar and using this energy to effectively shield incoming aircraft from detection. The idea evolved into a concept for environmentally powered electronic mist.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/578edd910a09.jpg[/atsimg]

This small Lear jet has a system to disperse chaff for over 11 minutes. I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard for mechanics to install this kind of system on larger aircraft or to change the material being used or to install extra tanks for extra material.

www.raytheon.com.au...

The jet features single channel forward/ aft noise jammers in three bands (C/D, E/F, G/H/I), a Radar Attack Threat Simulator (RATS), a single transceiver communications jammer and communications deception, a single channel coherent radar jammer within C/D or G/H/I bands (replacing the noise channel in the relevant band), and up to 11 minutes of continuous chaff

After 9/11 the FAA looked into installing misslie defense systems on commercial passenger jets. They considered chaff but ended up deciding that laser systems were better.

www.fas.org...


Passenger jets get missile defense systems
www.aiaa.org...

Civil antimissile systems take wing/Correspondence.
by Philip Butterworth-Hayes 2003
What its makers claim is the world’s first automated antimissile defense system for commercial aircraft is due to receive full certification by the end of this year. Flight Guard, a product of two Israeli companies, consists of an Elta radar to detect surface-to-air shoulder-launched missiles, and an Israeli Military Industries countermeasures dispensing system.

Countermeasures
Although passenger aircraft may not quite be the sitting ducks at first imagined, the less good news is that merely converting military antimissile systems to civil use does not provide a simple technical answer. There are several potential countermeasure technologies available—small decoy flares, infrared jammers, high-powered lasers, chaff, and towed decoy targets—but not all are suitable for civil aircraft applications.

reply to post by McKey


Ummmmm.....the title of that video? FALSE!!! The YouTube member who posted it, wrote the title.

Numbskull "chem"-trail believer, apparently.

CHAFF is not a chemical. It is physical, well-known, and in any event......there are no such things as "chem"-trails in the sense of the way this hysteria is attempting to say there are.

The only chemicals in the contrails are just what would be expected because of the burning of Jet-A1 fuel in the engines.

The exhaust of your car is probably dirtier.....