"Two chemtrail tanker jets almost collide with fed-ex commercial aircraft"

reply to post by Air0x




Sorry, but skywriting is nothing new nor does it have anything to do with so called chemtrails.

Here is some more skywriting...



and we have this one here...

reply to post by Air0x


Unfortunately, for all the years I was doing it? I have maybe a couple hundred pictures from all the miles I drove a truck. I just wasn't a picture kind of person in the blur of one load to another until pretty much the end and realizing I missed recording so much interesting stuff.

Nothing of the skies for this. Nope.. I'd most often see this in the mid to late afternoon going West across 40, then see the whole day becoming hazy by the time I'd get out of having lunch or a break in Amarillo. That happened several times and I'd imagine anyone on ATS living in the panhandle has seen it at one time or another.

Moving at a rate of 400-700 miles a day, every day for years? Trucking was a great place to see all kinds of things. Getting off the road is the place to find explanation for what the stuff was. lol...

reply to post by wrabbit2000


wrabbit, there is ZERO question about the existence of human attempts at manipulating the weather. No one here, as far as I know, has ever denied cloud seeding or such other attempts.

Entities can apply to perform cloud seeding, even in the US, and have done so over the years.

However, NONE of this is related to contrails or their formation, and NONE of this supports the mythological chemtrail.

reply to post by totallackey


Fair enough on that...but as long as there are things we see happening over our heads that don't lend themselves to easy explanation? As long as there would be reason and motive to want to manipulate weather? As long as the technology to do it exists..just like a chemtrail would look like, if that is what it was?

Well, then it seems a fair topic to ponder in general terms anyway, and calling it a myth is assuming other evidence not a part of the debate so far. Explanation of what some people do see, for starters. Now weather is just one offered explanation of chemtrails, as it seems the attack is on the whole concept itself here. I'd personally say screwing with weather is the most likely reason (assuming a lot to say it's all as it seems anyway), and viable for the means and motive...to look at it logically.

I really wonder why tho....when ATS has a whole forum dedicated to this and this forum isn't in the hoax bin, debunking the WHOLE concept, as a viable thing itself, seems the focus? Why not explaining what people are really seeing happen? (and...I have been out looking for explanations to some of what I've seen ..it isn't in the top 10 of Google ..or top 100 for that matter... Perhaps a future science course I take may explain it in 'collegese' from a $500 book..lol)

* I'd also note ..Seeding clouds by dropping chemicals into the atmosphere with aircraft was how the U.S. did it in the 70's experiments where Chemtrails, visible or not, were quite literally the point of the effort and the outcome desired. ( Utah's experience with cloud seeding ) If it's still happening? That's just it. It's still happening as a highly refined process starting long ago in an open failure, not a new idea. That makes it more likely as a possible explanation, IMO.

reply to post by wrabbit2000


The problem with cloud seeding though is that you need a cloud to begin with. What people claim are chemtrails are creating the clouds that would then be seeded, and that just doesn't work. Cirrus clouds (which is what contrails are) won't produce rain. They can become clouds that do, but they're too high and thin to produce rain.

If you think it's bad now, give it 10 years or so, when ADVENT and AETD enter the picture. As engine technology improves, we're seeing an increase in persistent contrails to go with it. The more efficient engines allow contrails to form in conditions that the older engines didn't, and allows them to persist in areas where older engines didn't. And it's only going to get worse. The ADVENT engine is going to be so much more efficient that current engines it's not funny (something like 25% less fuel burn), and it's going to be able to have a third airflow bypassing the engine core, so we're going to see some insane contrails from that.

reply to post by Air0x


Ah, OP, no offence intended, truly, but it's really rather amusing to see this videoosted AGAIN, and to see people getting their knickers in a twist about something they quite obviously don't understand.

Anyways, I'm off now to read the rest of the thread and if the usual patient members like Phage and Zaphod haven't already done it 'll post an explanation for you

reply to post by Pinkorchid


Instead of being amazed and astounded, why not try to simply get educated on the subject matter?

You may find it helps you to see through the crap

wrabbit2000
reply to post by totallackey

 

Fair enough on that...but as long as there are things we see happening over our heads that don't lend themselves to easy explanation?

Everyone posting on these threads, proponents (for the existence of chemtrails) and opponents (against the existence of chemtrails) see things happening over their heads. The proponents claim these things do not "lend themselves to easy explanation," despite the easy to understand science posted as an explantion.

As long as there would be reason and motive to want to manipulate weather? As long as the technology to do it exists..just like a chemtrail would look like, if that is what it was?

What does a chemtrail look like? A persistent contrail? Is there some other distinguishing characteristic we, the opponents, are missing? Some explanation that has somehow eluded us?

Well, then it seems a fair topic to ponder in general terms anyway, and calling it a myth is assuming other evidence not a part of the debate so far. Explanation of what some people do see, for starters.

I call it a myth because EVERY SINGLE EXPLANATION ever offered by a proponent on EVERY SINGLE CHEMTRAIL THREAD has been the same ignorant explanation OVER AND OVER AGAIN...

If there is additional evidence offered for the existence of chemtrails, I have yet to find it.

Now weather is just one offered explanation of chemtrails, as it seems the attack is on the whole concept itself here. I'd personally say screwing with weather is the most likely reason (assuming a lot to say it's all as it seems anyway), and viable for the means and motive...to look at it logically.

The science states the jet engine exhaust is caused by the atmospheric conditions. This is undeniable. Does the exhaust have a net affect on climate? The science is still out...

I really wonder why tho....when ATS has a whole forum dedicated to this and this forum isn't in the hoax bin, debunking the WHOLE concept, as a viable thing itself, seems the focus? Why not explaining what people are really seeing happen? (and...I have been out looking for explanations to some of what I've seen ..it isn't in the top 10 of Google ..or top 100 for that matter... Perhaps a future science course I take may explain it in 'collegese' from a $500 book..lol)

The forum title is GEO-ENGINEERING AND CHEMTRAILS. I do not know why the site owners choose to keep the CHEMTRAIL portion of the title.

As I stated above, we are all seeing the EXACT SAME thing above our heads. I, for one, am unable to determine the chemical make up of jet exhaust simply by looking at it...

On the other hand, there have been numerous posts offered, CLEARLY explaining WHAT contrails are, HOW they form, WHY they form, WHEN they form, WHERE they form, and WHO forms them...AND, the SCIENCE behind the WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, HOW, and WHY, is INDISPUTABLE!!! If this was a court of law, THE CASE WOULD BE CLOSED, ON THIS BASIS ALONE!

* I'd also note ..Seeding clouds by dropping chemicals into the atmosphere with aircraft was how the U.S. did it in the 70's experiments where Chemtrails, visible or not, were quite literally the point of the effort and the outcome desired. ( Utah's experience with cloud seeding ) If it's still happening? That's just it. It's still happening as a highly refined process starting long ago in an open failure, not a new idea. That makes it more likely as a possible explanation, IMO.

I also noted that cloud seeding is not the same thing as contrails. Cloud seeding does not take place at the same altitude as contrail formation.

As I have offered TIME AND TIME AGAIN, if anyone has ANY ACTUAL EVIDENCE of the existence of CHEMTRAILS, all they need do is contact her. A crime is being actively committed if chemtrails exist.

Double

reply to post by Air0x


It say's video unavailable(?) I'll try using search but I was hoping you could fix link... Ty

Is this the vid (?)


I don't know what the problem is posting this vid!

I'll paste the link

Link

S&F

reply to post by wrabbit2000


i have noticed the same thing wrabbit and i live far away from big airports in the u.k i do not remember that when i was young . one day i saw 2 planes at 50.000 + and 1 hour later the sky went from cloudless beautiful blue to grey overcast .

experts in aviation tell me it is the new engines that do this lets go back to the old ones then

reply to post by Air0x


The biggest problem (other than there is no way in hell that this was even remotely close to a near miss) is that none of the "KC-135s" or "military tankers" "identified" in the video are actually tankers. There's one that looks like an A340, one that looks like a 777-300LR, one that looks like a 747. Of those three, the only one used as a tanker is the 747, and the only country that uses it as a tanker is Iran (they have three). And I'm pretty sure that's not an Iranian aircraft (I'm not sure the tanker versions even leave Iranian airspace).

There are so many things just wrong in this video that it's not even funny.

reply to post by geobro


So you'd rather see this again?

707

Personally, I'll live with the contrails and clouds if it means that jet engines are burning that much cleaner, and putting out that much less pollution.

reply to post by Air0x


Chemtrails or not, that is a close call. Someone said it isn't close, well the size of those planes, and one flying headon towards 3 incoming tankers, that would have been huge. I hope this doesn't happen often.

geobro
experts in aviation tell me it is the new engines that do this

lets go back to the old ones then

The problem with that, is the new ones, the ones that create all those contrails, do so because they are much more efficient. They burn less fuel. Unfortunately, short of banning air travel, we will not seen an end to this until the teleporters start working a bit better.

But, the effects of the contrails have not gone un-noticed.

reply to post by SixX18


It happens all the time. If they weren't near enough to talk to ATC (which they obviously were since they radioed ATC) who would have warned them of traffic, then TCAS would have warned them of incoming traffic at their 12 o'clock and if it was close they would have told one of them to climb, and the other to descend to avoid a conflict.

ICAO and FAA regulations only require 1000 feet of vertical separation between aircraft over 29,000 feet in altitude. Most will try to keep more, but this wasn't anywhere even close to a near miss. They were twice as high as minimum separation required, and were never in any danger of colliding.

i read through most of the posts before my comment, just to let you all know.


a couple observations:

1. ive seen days that started with perfectly clear blue skies and watched as the jets created their criss crossed patterns and as the day wears on these 'trails' disperse out and make almost the entire sky milky white where one can barely see the blue sky at all. What are those trails? I have no idea....but i dont need a scientific explanation to know that what im looking at when this happens is clearly the result of the trails left by those planes. I have many pictures of the beginning and ending of those kinds of days just for my own amusement.


2. there is a world wide phenomenon known as 'global dimming' that many scientists agree is a real phenomenon and it may or may not have anything to do with chemtrails but many to admit that contrails may be contributing to it. My question on this point is....what does it matter of those trails are 'chemtrails' or 'contrails' if they are affecting the amount of sunshine that reaches the surface of the planet?

3. many people, scientists included, have performed soil sample tests over time and found increased quantities of barium, strontium and aluminum. These tests in many cases are conducted far away from coal burning plants, factories, high auto traffic etc, which could explain these increased deposits.

4. who says a chemtrail needs to be white? what qualities of dispersing either various metal particles or biological material as some have suggested would render visible chemtrails? in other words, chemtrails dont even need to be seen to be real if the materials being sprayed dont reflect/refract light in such a way to make them visible. Just a thought.



for myself i have no doubt that modern science/technology government operations have availed themselves of the opportunity to spray various materials into the atmosphere to achieve various goals....one of those that is easy to confirm is the military use of barium for the purpose of high resolution 3d mapping of terrain.

usahitman.com...

instigatah
1. ive seen days that started with perfectly clear blue skies and watched as the jets created their criss crossed patterns and as the day wears on these 'trails' disperse out and make almost the entire sky milky white where one can barely see the blue sky at all. What are those trails? I have no idea....but i dont need a scientific explanation to know that what im looking at when this happens is clearly the result of the trails left by those planes. I have many pictures of the beginning and ending of those kinds of days just for my own amusement.

No, actually it's the result of a weather front moving in. The planes flying ahead of the front leave more persistent contrails because of the incoming front.

3. many people, scientists included, have performed soil sample tests over time and found increased quantities of barium, strontium and aluminum. These tests in many cases are conducted far away from coal burning plants, factories, high auto traffic etc, which could explain these increased deposits.

Because the plane flying overhead at 30,000+ feet is so much more likely to cause an increase in those samples right? I mean it's not like those are naturally occurring elements, or that aluminum is the most plentiful element on earth.

Just because it's away from some sources doesn't mean it is away from ALL sources that could cause an increase.

reply to post by instigatah

usahitman.com...

There is a little problem with that link...

One involves cloud creation experiments to lessen the effect of global warming. Other chemtrails are connected with the military’s extremely high-power Radio Frequency beam weapon in Alaska called HAARP.

usahitman.com...

There has never been any evidence that proves HAARP can control weather let alone react with so called chemtrails.

And if anyone can show that connection I would love to see it...

reply to post by instigatah

4. who says a chemtrail needs to be white? what qualities of dispersing either various metal particles or biological material as some have suggested would render visible chemtrails?

That would be a really good question if chemtrails actually existed.