Vapour trails, contrails or chemtrails? Fact or fiction?

Post by **TonyGosling** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:46 pm

simplesimon wrote:
Tony - my starting point is that free speech is either absolute, or meaningless, and ideally I would have no moderation here whatsoever.

You have 100% total free speech but not on the front page which is for well sourced info and discussions on 911 and the war on terror.

sam · Post by **sam** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:59 pm

Well, I'm surprised that not one photo has been advanced showing a plane laying down an inexplicable number/type of trails.

With "chemtrail" planes at times criss-crossing our skies so clearly why not just acquire a decent camera with good telephoto lens. Then sell the story to The Sun. Not only do you blow the gaff on the chemtrail business, but earn a few bob into the bargain.

It's quite a mystery ....

telecasterisation · Post by **telecasterisation** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:04 am

sam wrote:Well, I'm surprised that not one photo has been advanced showing a plane laying down an inexplicable number/type of trails.

With "chemtrail" planes at times criss-crossing our skies so clearly why not just acquire a decent camera with good telephoto lens. Then sell the story to The Sun. Not only do you blow the gaff on the chemtrail business, but earn a few bob into the bargain.

It's quite a mystery ....

No sam, that's a radical request shift - you clearly asked for one OR the other - not both. Why have you not dealt in any way with the first image instead of focusing on what hasn't been supplied?

I didn't know you wanted both, you should have been clearer;

sam · Post by **sam** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:23 pm

telecasterisation wrote:
sam wrote:Well, I'm surprised that not one photo has been advanced showing a plane laying down an inexplicable number/type of trails.

With "chemtrail" planes at times criss-crossing our skies so clearly why not just acquire a decent camera with good telephoto lens. Then sell the story to The Sun. Not only do you blow the gaff on the chemtrail business, but earn a few bob into the bargain.

It's quite a mystery ....
No sam, that's a radical request shift - you clearly asked for one OR the other - not both. Why have you not dealt in any way with the first image instead of focusing on what hasn't been supplied?

I didn't know you wanted both, you should have been clearer;

Either/or still applies. What makes you think otherwise?

Your motive for the prank first image is for you to reveal if you so wish.

telecasterisation · Post by **telecasterisation** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:34 pm

You appear to be getting the hang of it - there is no such thing as photographic evidence in this type of electronically based environment.

Your request for such is completely void and meaningless because as soon as someone supplies exactly what you ask for - you scream 'FAKE!'.

So what WOULD constitute satisfactory evidence for you as far as what is submissable here? I go out and with a high powered optic capture exactly what you request - you say 'Rubbish', - what next?

(That is a generalisation, I am not saying I took any of the supplied images).

sam · Post by **sam** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:55 pm

telecasterisation wrote:You appear to be getting the hang of it - there is no such thing as photographic evidence in this type of electronically based environment.

Your request for such is completely void and meaningless because as soon as someone supplies exactly what you ask for - you scream 'FAKE!'.

So what WOULD constitute satisfactory evidence for you as far as what is submissable here? I go out and with a high powered optic capture exactly what you request - you say 'Rubbish', - what next?

(That is a generalisation, I am not saying I took any of the supplied images).

You still haven't clarified the either/or confusion. My wife has taught English for 35 years and believes my original post and the follow-up are consistent in meaning. I'm not quite sure why you're getting so worked up about it and finding a contradiction where none exists.

Regarding the photofakery issue - I haven't "screamed" at all, merely had a quiet giggle at your first image. Can you provide links to your various photos in their original context?

And "satisfactory evidence" - for me - would begin with good quality photos of either/both of the phenomena I mentioned at the top. Live footage of chemtrail operations would then remove the possibility of photofakery. The fact that the chemtrail believers have not taken even the simple and inexpensive first step to exposing the "conspiracy" suggests very strongly that they are more interested in protecting their fantasy than exposing offical wrong-doings. And this, basically, was the whole point of my OP.

telecasterisation · Post by **telecasterisation** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:39 am

Sam

You asked for;

If that same aircraft is spraying a "chemtrail" then the aircraft will be :

1) laying down more trails than it has engines (where the chemtrail spray emanates from somewhere other than the engine exhaust area)

or

2) laying down a trail that starts immediately (where the chemtrail spray emanates from the engine exhaust area)

One was supplied.

You then acted;

………. surprised that not one photo has been advanced showing a plane laying down an inexplicable number/type of trails.

When you never stipulated you wanted examples of both. Had you used 'and' instead of 'or', all this sabre rattling about your living arrangements with English teaching experts wouldn't have been needed.

I don’t know how much experience of boards such as this you have, but before you arrived, we have been over countless assorted images and video footage of every conspiracy conceivable. No-one has been able to validate the authenticity of any of it – to enter a debate over such serves no purpose.

The original image I posted is genuine – however, it is simply dumping fuel at altitude. I am not an exponent of chemtrails.

mr nice · Post by **mr nice** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:34 am

Sam what do you think of this link?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaPqCMIuEk4
Although the explanation given by official sources in Germany is at best iffy surely you cannot deny the validity of questioning this phenomenon after watching the above link?
This clip is quite old now and I am reliably informed by friends from Germany that the story has disappeared without a trace from the mainstream news outlets even though there is fairly widespread acknowledgement of chemtrails being something that need an explanation in all areas of German society.
Your assumption that nothing is being done to raise awareness of this issue for fear of it dissolving under the glare of scrutiny is misinformed as there are ongoing attempts in the UK to bring this to the mainstream.If only is was as simple as you say to go to the sun with a few pictures and get it reported on "just like that"
I feel you are showing your naivety in these controversial matters to spout such simplistic suggestions or maybe you are just trying to ridicule the people who show and interest in this subject.

acrobat74 · Post by **acrobat74** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:44 am

mr nice wrote:Sam what do you think of this link?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaPqCMIuEk4

The video above looks kind of credible on the surface, but we'd definitely need to know more.

(1) Who is this gentleman, Karsten Brandt, and what are his motives?
Do we know?

(2) I'd like to see some healthy peer review, i.e. other weather scientists confirming or rejecting his claims.
Scientific method please.

Finally, I can't see how the issue 'disappeared from the media' if it's on RTL?

RTL is owned by Bertelsmann:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTL_Group

As for the ownership of Bertelsmann:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertelsmann

Ownership

Bertelsmann itself is not publicly listed, and is majority owned (76.9%) by the Bertelsmann Foundation, a non-profit organisation and political think tank set up by the founding family Mohn. The remaining 23.1% is owned by the Mohn Family. Albert Frère, a Belgian industrial, owned 25% of Bertelsmann until 2006.

Rings a bell?

sam · Post by **sam** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:24 pm

telecasterisation wrote: ...
One was supplied.

You then acted;

………. surprised that not one photo has been advanced showing a plane laying down an inexplicable number/type of trails.
When you never stipulated you wanted examples of both. Had you used 'and' instead of 'or', all this sabre rattling about your living arrangements with English teaching experts wouldn't have been needed.

"If you live with dogs/cats in the house then you will need to address the problem of fleas, especially if you have fitted carpets and central heating"
The "dogs/cats" construction serves to indicate either/or. I have never asked for both phenomena, and I still fail to see why you're making a fuss about this.

telecasterisation wrote: I don’t know how much experience of boards such as this you have, but before you arrived, we have been over countless assorted images and video footage of every conspiracy conceivable. No-one has been able to validate the authenticity of any of it – to enter a debate over such serves no purpose.

The original image I posted is genuine – however, it is simply dumping fuel at altitude. I am not an exponent of chemtrails.

I had already noticed that you're not a proponent of chemtrail CT.

However, the original question remains unanswered. Often boards such as this announce "huge chemtrail operation over East Anglia" or somesuch, accompanied by photos of criss-cross lingering aircraft trails. Why do these folk not have the wit to grab some decent photos of the spraying? As you have pointed out, the sheer number of aircraft involved - worldwide - must be absolutely staggering and they apparently do their nefarious business in plain vew of countless millions of people.

Naturally I recognise I'm talking to the wrong person here, but I often have time on my hands while I'm waiting for a batch of plaster or cement to set. However, the silence of the chemtrail gang is pretty deafening.

telecasterisation · Post by **telecasterisation** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:28 pm

sam wrote: I had already noticed that you're not a pro......................is pretty deafening.

Having spent some time perusing the posts at Chemtrail Central, it is obvious that few Chemtrailers support the multiple exhaust theory, or rather, more exhaust trails than actual propulsion units/engines.

My take is that by the very nature of the longevity of a contrail - this equates automatically to being 'chem' based as opposed to simple 'con' based. Therefore, it must be concluded (by me at least), that the particulate is mixed with the engine exhaust to eliminate more trails than expected being captured on film.

In other words, if this is indeed a global conspiracy costing quite a few quid and a fair old bit in administration time, can we honestly expect such a detail as 'more trails than engines' being allowed to upset the apple cart?

If chemtrails are reality, it will not be identified by such a simple visual marker - this much is obvious, for if we are being sprayed and the majority of persisent trails are something more dubious, then we already know that the number of trails match the number of engines.

Leiff · Post by **Leiff** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 7:13 pm

sam

I'm afraid I haven't got the spare time to discuss chemtrails with you.

Why don't you grab your camera and go and take some decent photos that 'prove' contrails?

sam · Post by **sam** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Leiff wrote:sam

I'm afraid I haven't got the spare time to discuss chemtrails with you.

Why don't you grab your camera and go and take some decent photos that 'prove' contrails?

Because they are the default option - accepted by the world of aeronautics, meteorology and science in general. They don't need "proving". It's for the contradictory theory to displace the 'accepted' theory with superior evidence. That's how science works. Perhaps you didn't realise that?

The alternative would be (for example) for believers in the heliocentric theory of the structure of the Solar System to have to constantly reiterate the long-accepted proof of heliocentricity in the face of every idiot who comes along and points out that their house stays still while the sun moves across the sky.

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:02 pm

Inside A Chemtrail Sprayer

http://www.rense.com/general80/inside.htm

sam · Post by **sam** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:31 pm

Linda wrote:Inside A Chemtrail Sprayer

http://www.rense.com/general80/inside.htm

What's the background to this photo? Do you have any evidence that these canisters contain some nefarious chemicals or biological agents as opposed to, say, cloud-seeding materials?

Please don't post photos such as this as though the mere existence of cans in a plane proves something dodgy is going on.

zoomer · Post by **zoomer** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:40 pm

check this out. GOt EM! CHEMTRAILS ON GERMAN TV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVc9GX5K_As

Bushwacker · Post by **Bushwacker** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:54 pm

Linda wrote:Inside A Chemtrail Sprayer

http://www.rense.com/general80/inside.htm

It seems rather perverse to post this as "Inside A Chemtrail Sprayer" when the actual piece is entitled "Inside A Chemtrail Sprayer - NOT!" and consists of an explanation of what it actually is!

SHERITON HOTEL · Post by **SHERITON HOTEL** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 1:09 pm

Is there one of those 'Petition 10 Downing street' thingies up and running ref. chemtrails and what they are, anyone know?

Post by **fish5133** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:48 pm

Beautiful blue skies over north Wirral early today but as morning wore on the skies became criss crossed with trails. Low level jets taking off from Liverpool had no trails but high altitude ones did. Weather was chilly and only slight breeze. After a while the trails drift and left large patches of "cloud" obscuring the sky. Been careful not to say "chemtrails" but either way the trails cause clouds which last for hours even the whole day
One question that arose from my observations

1) why do some jets clearly have a trail but the trail doesnt remain. If its cool enough to condensate and show a trail then shouldnt the trail remain like others in the sky

Actually got my video camera out to capture trails. havent got the hang of it yet as loose focus as the plane moves. Tried 800x magnification but cant focus on plane or even find it. 64x seems about the best but even on tripod its a bit shaky. Need to do a serious editing job to remove all blurred footage.(majority)

Anyone with tips on videoing fast moving objects at 25000ft! with bog standard Sony camcorder.?

sam · Post by **sam** » Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:44 pm

fish5133 wrote: Anyone with tips on videoing fast moving objects at 25000ft! with bog standard Sony camcorder.?

First tip - if you want (?) evidence of dodgy "trails" just use a still camera with fat telephoto lens.

Post by **fish5133** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 1:41 am

Thanks sam will give that a go.

utopiated · Post by **utopiated** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 1:53 am

telecasterisation wrote:

Those are vapour trails created from aerolons - I had this plane image on a site but I concluded after it was not the real thing.

Check the video on youtube where the Italian aerosol activists use a calibrated laser pointer at night on a spraying place. They prove it is creating spay formations at BELOW the NASA official level for vapour [which is what we're talking about for CONtrail] formation.

Newspeak International · Sat Mar 08, 2008 3:08 pm

Apart from Tele,(who has replied on the other thread) can any one else see wierdness here:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz5grO0qvAs[/youtube]

utopiated · Post by **utopiated** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:02 pm

That's been zapped by something... it's pretty obvious that these things are up there as a base or electromagnetic 'soup' for additional technology.

Newspeak International · Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:08 pm

Cheers for replying UT.

I'd really like to know is this a chemical reaction process that takes place
in a lab between 2 or more elements,or more a resonant frequency
effect from elsewhere?

slower · Post by **slower** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:37 pm

in 1st 30 secs 2 perfect egs of long chemtrails with plane and normal trails next to them,

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea2kiLOdUkw

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zxMuXt_T5KU&feature=user

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=aSbb9HHbKyU

theres a few others as well

ive worked outside all my life, always checking the clouds for rain, about 10 years water sports (windsurfing) always looking for clouds to get a bit of wind, these trails that stay forever have only been around 4 a few years,
and there r diff types, u c ones that have the dripping paint effect , the ones that spread out in thick bands, ones that look like long tubes, they can b high they can b very low, they are totally diff to each other, ive been watching them every day 4 about a year now been filming them 4 about 3 months. moisture is moisture and cant behave like this, ive two planes one leaving big long trail and the one beside it a tiny short trail

wepmob2000 · Post by **wepmob2000** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:12 am

Linda wrote:Inside A Chemtrail Sprayer

http://www.rense.com/general80/inside.htm

Sorry, that picture shows kegs of water, used as ballast in lieu of passengers during flight testing of new airliners. You can see the various flight test data equipment in the racks in the background. I believe this is the interior of the upper deck of the A-380, I have similar pictures somewhere.........

alfsevic · Post by **alfsevic** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:24 pm

RTV News in Germany have sent a report over weather manipulation over the country. The film is in german, but with subtitles.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVc9GX5K ... tuell.html[/youtube]

alfsevic · Post by **alfsevic** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:41 pm

Here is another inside a chemical tanker.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzbz9NPmpUA&eurl[/youtube]

Lee · Post by **Lee** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:05 pm

nice posts.

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom

Vapour trails, contrails or chemtrails? Fact or fiction?

Chemtrails goes Mainstream in Germany