Where Have All The Planes Gone?

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

No i have never been on a jury my point is that there is enough proof to question your belief that no such program is in operation.

It is evidence, not proof.

The fact that you won't even say that yes it is a possibility even when provided with facts that they have the teck and they have done it in the past speaks volumes.

I have said many times that it is technically possible to spray "chemtrails" - the technology has existed for decades, and I know they did so in the past.

If you are going to accuse me of something at least make some effort to get it right

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Ok so why are you now so sure that there is no project of this type under way at this time and do you have pics of the trail's from the previous tests so that we have a basis from which we can deduce what is a contrail and what is not a normal contrail.
All to often when pic's of strange trail's are posted the response from your side is that it is just a normal contrail if we had something to put the pic up against [pic from earlier chemtrail projects] then we could all see that it is normal or is not normal have you in your research come across any such pic's?


also you are right i should have put evidence and not proof my bad.

Originally posted by djcarlosa

All to often when pic's of strange trail's are posted the response from your side is that it is just a normal contrail if we had something to put the pic up against [pic from earlier chemtrail projects] then we could all see that it is normal or is not normal have you in your research come across any such pic's?

If you think it's strange, then surely that means you have a reason to think it is strange?

So, explain why you think a particular trail is strange.

Surely you would want to compare it to old photos of contrails, not old chemical spray programs? If it looks different to old contrails, then that shows it's not a normal contrail. But if it looks the same as, or different to old spray program, then that really tells you nothing either way.

reply to post by Uncinus


How can you say that to compare what we are seeing in the sky against old chemtrail programs would not be helpful after all we have some pic's of contrail's what we don't have is pic's of true chemtrail's.
If we had the pic's of chemtrails we then know what the difference's are between the two and then place all pic's up against the 2 and decide what is normal and not a normal contrail's rather than only having pic's of contrails and then class all trail's as contrail's.
Seams like a reasonable request to me.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Ok so why are you now so sure that there is no project of this type under way at this time

I don't know that at all.

What I do know, is that there has been no credible evidence presented to me that there IS one. Yes I'm aware that credibility can be subjective - but there's been no verifiable eviddence either, and verfiable is not objective.

and do you have pics of the trail's from the previous tests so that we have a basis from which we can deduce what is a contrail and what is not a normal contrail.

We have the video of het British tests from Porton Down using a Valetta aircraft - you can search for it on YT & it's been posted on ATS many times.

All to often when pic's of strange trail's are posted the response from your side is that it is just a normal contrail if we had something to put the pic up against [pic from earlier chemtrail projects] then we could all see that it is normal or is not normal have you in your research come across any such pic's?

As above - there are also pics around of cloud seeding and fuel dumping - each has characteristics that are different from contrails - eg cloud seeding is barely visible when using silver iodide, and bulky dispersals of slat or dry ice also disperse and simply do not look like contrails - they are irregular, do not "flow" etc.

Uncinus made a post of the characteristics of some, and there was a long thread with bsbray11 where he tried to tell us all that cloud seeding was chemtrails - there are multiple photos in that somewhere.

What usually happens is someone psots a picture of a long contrail, maybe a spreading one and says it is a chemtrail, and "we debunkers" say that it looks like a contrail....because it does look like a contrail - so we ask why the poster thinks it is not a contrail.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


The pic's i require would be photos of the agent orange program and the tests done in the USA not pic's of cloud seeding as that although could by definition be classed as a chemtrail it falls in the realm of weather manipulation rather than geoengineering to combat global warming.
The fact i question what i see is normal contrail's is because the change is so recent.The contrail's i am used to seeing, that i have been seeing for most of my life do not look like they do now and do not act in the way they do now.
This is why i started to research what i was seeing and first came across the term chemtrail's with pic's that mirrored what i was seeing.
Now the funny thing is that in the states they have had this happening for the last 11 years now if i was to believe you and the science behind contrail's and that all trail's in the sky where just contrail's then why were there no such trail's here last year or the year before that or as far back as i can remember after all you expect us to believe that this has always happened then why have i not noticed it before this year when i like nothing more than to lie on my back in the garden and watch the sky's.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Uncinus

 

How can you say that to compare what we are seeing in the sky against old chemtrail programs would not be helpful after all we have some pic's of contrail's what we don't have is pic's of true chemtrail's.
If we had the pic's of chemtrails we then know what the difference's are between the two and then place all pic's up against the 2 and decide what is normal and not a normal contrail's rather than only having pic's of contrails and then class all trail's as contrail's.
Seams like a reasonable request to me.

Firstly, I think your usage of the word "chemtrail" is REALLY confusing the discussion. You should use words that describe exactly what you are talking about, as you know there's many different usages for "chemtrail" - some of which specifically exclude low level spraying, and some exclude crop dusting (including defoliants).

So what you want to do is see if current photos that people say don't look like contrails, actually look like various old types of chemical spraying.

But that's making a huge assumption - that they don't look like contrails.

First of all you've got to demonstrate that they don't look like contrails. Because if they DO look like contrails then either:

A) The old chemical spraying also looks like contrails, so it might be something similar, or contrails
B) The old chemical spraying does not look like contrails, so this might be contrails, or some new chemical spraying that looks like contrails, or an old type of chemical spray that also looks like contrails, but we don't have pictures of.

So it tells you nothing, as either way, any trail that looks and behaves like a contrail is either a contrail, or chemical trail that looks like a contrail.

On the other hand, if you can demonstrate that some trails don't look like contrails, then that pretty much proves that they are not contrails, and hence are chemtrails.

So why not start with that. Are there ANY trails that don't look like contrails? Is there any reason to be suspicious of any particular trail?
So why not start there?

Originally posted by djcarlosa

Now the funny thing is that in the states they have had this happening for the last 11 years now if i was to believe you and the science behind contrail's and that all trail's in the sky where just contrail's then why were there no such trail's here last year or the year before that or as far back as i can remember after all you expect us to believe that this has always happened then why have i not noticed it before this year when i like nothing more than to lie on my back in the garden and watch the sky's.

Most people STILL have not noticed them, and will likely go through their entire lives without really paying them any attention. You are just more observant than average.

reply to post by Uncinus


Please read my last post you will find what type of pic's i would like to look at as these would contain heaver chemicals and therefore may well give a clear difference in terms of colouration and thickness to a normal contrail.
It may also explain why i'm so sure that the contrail's of this year are not normal i notice change in my surroundings especially ones as dramatic as these trail's are.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

The pic's i require would be photos of the agent orange program

there's lots on google - google agent orange images search

there;'s are also many videos on YT such as this one:

and the tests done in the USA

dunno if ther are any pics of those.

The fact i question what i see is normal contrail's is because the change is so recent.The contrail's i am used to seeing, that i have been seeing for most of my life do not look like they do now and do not act in the way they do now.

What is different about them from before?

duration and spreading aer documented from a long time ago - those 2 aspects are possibly jsut things yuo never paid attention to "before".

And htere are many more because there are many more large jets flying, and they have more efficient engines that, paradoxically, make more contrails and can do so at lower altitudes than older jets (eg see this pdf - elib.dlr.de... - it is the source of this famous pic of 2 a/c flying side by side with 1 making contrails and another not -



Is there anything else that is different?

reply to post by Uncinus


quote:Most people STILL have not noticed them, and will likely go through their entire lives without really paying them any attention. You are just more observant than average.

That statement is sadly true but you still sidestep the point i'm making [nice try]that the trail's left by some planes have changed dramatically this year.
I have noticed the difference so from that i can deduce that something is not right and it is this that has brought me here.
So based on that alone bring's into question all the contrail's science that state that this has always happened when my visual evidence states otherwise.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Ok so why are you now so sure that there is no project of this type under way at this time and do you have pics of the trail's from the previous tests so that we have a basis from which we can deduce what is a contrail and what is not a normal contrail.
All to often when pic's of strange trail's are posted the response from your side is that it is just a normal contrail if we had something to put the pic up against [pic from earlier chemtrail projects] then we could all see that it is normal or is not normal have you in your research come across any such pic's?

edit on 27-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)

also you are right i should have put evidence and not proof my bad.

edit on 27-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)

There is plenty of evidence
Let them disbelieve
Perhaps they have interest in it.

The term here is
SAG
Stratospheric
Aerosol
Geo-engineering

It is happening.....
4 years looking at evidence
my own eyes
had posters of Apollo
as a kid everything I was
was about aviation
I come from an
Aviation family
It is
beyond discussion at this point.

End Transmission

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Uncinus

 

That statement is sadly true but you still sidestep the point i'm making [nice try]that the trail's left by some planes have changed dramatically this year.

In what way?

reply to post by djcarlosa


Hey d.j.
Being bombarded on all sides, i see.
I realised the futility of argument against persons who
impose their theory based reality (oft written and overseen by agencies
clouded in suspicion) and discount the testimony
of thousands of reliable people worldwide.

Just to report, a beautiful clear blue sky all day today
and only 4-5 planes fly-overs.

The Alleviation Continues.
For how long, is the question?

I have a feeling that aerosol-spraying deniers are more likely
to be Official Story supporters in controversies such as 9/11 and JFK etc.

A fool follows a fool but
A traitor follows a murderer and liar.

regards.

Originally posted by Newts

There is plenty of evidence
Let them disbelieve
Perhaps they have interest in it.

The term here is
SAG
Stratospheric
Aerosol
Geo-engineering

It is happening.....

we all know what the term is - so if there's plenty of evidence that it is happening (as opposed to being talked about) then why can't anyone actually present that evidence??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


good video and it reminds me of another vid that was posted here once before that [so say]has been proven to be a fraud the trail's left behind that plane looked like the ones left by that plane in your vid clip.
coincidence maybe if i believed in coincidence.
I do believe it was on this thread somewhere but i am sure you know of the vid i am talking about.

reply to post by djcarlosa


The KC-10 video that crops up every now and then?

There's some discussion of it here - www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


So you can see no similarity's between the 2 vids amount of trails coming out from the planes for example?
This alone should question whether the plane is chem trailing as has been previously put forward and also question why your side have claimed it has been debunked.
perhaps this vid can be looked at again and compared with the vid you just posted so we can compare the two.
Like i said pic's or vids of true chemtrail's can be very helpful as a comparison when looking at contrail pic's and vids.


P.S that was not the vid i was referring to.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
That statement is sadly true but you still sidestep the point i'm making [nice try]that the trail's left by some planes have changed dramatically this year.

How do you know they have changed (as opposed to you just noticing them more now)?

reply to post by djcarlosa


Which 2 vids? If the one you referred to before isn't the KC-10 one then I do not know what one that was - there are clear differences betwen the contrails in that and the spray in the agent orange one for example - the KC-10 contrails are thin and wispy and are coming from the top of the wing - the agent orange ones are coming in thick streams from the sprayers and then disperse.

If you are going to make claims of visual differences between videos (or pictures if you have any) perhaps you could embed the apropraite evidence in a post so it is obvious for everyone??