Jack White Posted April 16, 2008 Author Share Posted April 16, 2008 Here is my favorite of the chemtrail photos taken from my house. This picturewas made at 6:46 pm on June 22, 2006. It shows a jetliner heading east in a DFW landing approach. Somewhat higher is a chemplane heading west laying a twin trail. Two planes, same photo...one a chemplane, the other a jetliner. Jack And you give the reason for it yourself in your own description. The planes are at different altitudes and thus in different air conditions. It is not surprising that one is in contrail conducive conditions and the other is not. Why should it be? Especially as the sky at the altitude of the contrail plane is already showing cirrus clouds. How do you know it is a "chemtrail"? Has anybody tested a sample taken directly from the trail? Predictable response. What you mistakenly call CIRRUS CLOUDS are DISSIPATING CHEMTRAILS which I watched being laid earlier. Winds aloft spread them rapidly. I had watched them being laid, which is why I went in the house to get my camera. I was there. You were not. Please cite references regarding the different air conditions that day at different altitudes. I gave the exact time of the photo. Surely you can provide statistics regarding the "different air conditions" on that date and location. "Guesses" are not research. The photo is evidence. Your speculation is not research. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 (edited) Here is my favorite of the chemtrail photos taken from my house. This picturewas made at 6:46 pm on June 22, 2006. It shows a jetliner heading east in a DFW landing approach. Somewhat higher is a chemplane heading west laying a twin trail. Two planes, same photo...one a chemplane, the other a jetliner. Jack And you give the reason for it yourself in your own description. The planes are at different altitudes and thus in different air conditions. It is not surprising that one is in contrail conducive conditions and the other is not. Why should it be? Especially as the sky at the altitude of the contrail plane is already showing cirrus clouds. How do you know it is a "chemtrail"? Has anybody tested a sample taken directly from the trail? Predictable response. What you mistakenly call CIRRUS CLOUDS are DISSIPATING CHEMTRAILS which I watched being laid earlier. Winds aloft spread them rapidly. I had watched them being laid, which is why I went in the house to get my camera. I was there. You were not. Please cite references regarding the different air conditions that day at different altitudes. I gave the exact time of the photo. Surely you can provide statistics regarding the "different air conditions" on that date and location. "Guesses" are not research. The photo is evidence. Your speculation is not research. Jack It is only a predictable response because it is true. What you mistakenly call DISSIPATING CHEMTRAILS are CIRRUS CLOUDS regardless of how they were formed unless you can show me a chemical analysis of a trail collected in the trail that shows something other than normal jet exhaust byproducts. Do that and I'll change my opinion that minute. The lower plane not leaving a contrail that you said was landing at DFW would be under 10,000 feet. Persistent contrails are extremely, extremely unlikely at that altitude under any conditions (the air is too warm, air temperature drops about 3 degrees Celcius per 1000 feet altitude). The photo is evidence of a persistent contrail left by the higher plane. The presence of any chemicals unrelated to normal jet exhaust has never been proven. Here is the results of your request/demand ( which you likely won't believe anyway). http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/cont_p...25&engEff=2 Well gee, the relative humidity with respect to ice or RHI was well above what is necessary to expect persistent contrails. That link is to an air pressure of 225 mb or about 25,000 feet. The highest pressure that site goes up to is 400 mb which is about 20,000 feet. That isn't low enough to see the humidity conditions that would affect a plane landing at DFW as previously mentioned it would be below 10,000 feet. Not that it matters because as also previously mentioned the air below 10,000 feet would be too warm. For those interested, the RHI at about 20,000 feet or 400 mb pressure for that date and time is here http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/cont_p...00&engEff=2 My "speculation" is based on years of personal research and information gathered while acquiring two degrees in aviation. It is also plain common sense to know that two planes at obviously two very different altitudes would be in different air conditions. Edited April 16, 2008 by Matthew Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 But Jack has photos! All you have are facts and expertise. And photos never lie or convey an incorrect assessment, do they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 20, 2008 Author Share Posted April 20, 2008 X is the letter of choice for the govt chemtrail skywriters...here over downtown Houston TX. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 20, 2008 Author Share Posted April 20, 2008 Another big X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 20, 2008 Author Share Posted April 20, 2008 Worldwide, X marks the spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 20, 2008 Author Share Posted April 20, 2008 More Xs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 20, 2008 Author Share Posted April 20, 2008 And more Xs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 20, 2008 Author Share Posted April 20, 2008 An H? A T? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 What else is it supposed to look like when air traffic crosses paths? Are you trying to imply that normal air traffic should not cross paths? How are these supposed to be different from persistent contrails which have been known to exist since airplanes could fly high enough? http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/report...ca-wr-l-474.pdf Like this photo from 1967 Also see this page http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-...ding-contrails/ with pics and stories dating back to the 40's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 21, 2008 Author Share Posted April 21, 2008 Evergreen Company* announces 747 aerial spraying system, 2006 *(Evergreen is a favorite name for CIA proprietary front companies) The Evergreen Supertanker demonstration tour is being rescheduled while the system undergoes additional refinement. Please check back regularly for updates. Evergreen International Aviation’s aerial application experience goes back to 1924. Evergreen continues its legacy of leading the industry by combining over 70 years of firefighting experience with over half a million hours of 747 experience to develop the world’s next generation of aerial application platforms—the Evergreen Supertanker. Evergreen has invested 3 years and over $40 million of its own money to develop a multi-mission aerial application platform capable of responding to firefighting, weather modification, biochemical decontamination, and oil spill response missions worldwide. The Supertanker will perform emergency response missions to save lives, natural resources, homes, and communities. The Supertanker can do this while saving the U.S. government and industry millions of dollars. Evergreen is honored to offer the Supertanker to emergency response professionals that are working tirelessly to protect Americans from the threat of fire and other catastrophic events. Mission Profiles Include: • Firefighting • Weather Modification • Biochemical Decontamination • Oil Spill Containment Press Release: Evergreen International Aviation to Showcase 747 Supertanker at Demonstrations Nationwide March 27, 2006 Photo of plane dropping fire-retardant chemicals for firefighting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 21, 2008 Author Share Posted April 21, 2008 Here is a really strange chemtrail photo... ...what appears to be an "LX" with a line thru it, along with a prismatic sun dog of the oily chemicals in the upper air. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 21, 2008 Author Share Posted April 21, 2008 What else is it supposed to look like when air traffic crosses paths? Are you trying to imply that normal air traffic should not cross paths? How are these supposed to be different from persistent contrails which have been known to exist since airplanes could fly high enough?http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/report...ca-wr-l-474.pdf Like this photo from 1967 Also see this page http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-...ding-contrails/ with pics and stories dating back to the 40's. Thanks for posting the excellent CHEMTRAIL photo. Had not seen that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted April 21, 2008 Share Posted April 21, 2008 Thanks for posting the excellent CHEMTRAIL photo. Had not seen that one. Sorry, Jack, it is a photo of persitent contrails. And more than that, it is proof that persistent contrails have been around for decades instead of starting in the late 90's like "chemtrail" believers like to make up. and I notice you ignored the questions I posted. Typical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted April 21, 2008 Share Posted April 21, 2008 (edited) Evergreen Company* announces747 aerial spraying system, 2006 *(Evergreen is a favorite name for CIA proprietary front companies and those who like pine trees. Any proof this company is a CIA front or are you just slandering an entire company on a whim?) The Evergreen Supertanker demonstration tour is being rescheduled while the system undergoes additional refinement. Please check back regularly for updates. Evergreen International Aviation’s aerial application experience goes back to 1924. Evergreen continues its legacy of leading the industry by combining over 70 years of firefighting experience with over half a million hours of 747 experience to develop the world’s next generation of aerial application platforms—the Evergreen Supertanker. Evergreen has invested 3 years and over $40 million of its own money to develop a multi-mission aerial application platform capable of responding to firefighting, weather modification, biochemical decontamination, and oil spill response missions worldwide. The Supertanker will perform emergency response missions to save lives, natural resources, homes, and communities. The Supertanker can do this while saving the U.S. government and industry millions of dollars. Evergreen is honored to offer the Supertanker to emergency response professionals that are working tirelessly to protect Americans from the threat of fire and other catastrophic events. Mission Profiles Include: • Firefighting • Weather Modification • Biochemical Decontamination • Oil Spill Containment Press Release: Evergreen International Aviation to Showcase 747 Supertanker at Demonstrations Nationwide March 27, 2006 Photo of plane dropping fire-retardant chemicals for firefighting... Congrats Jack, you've found proof of aerial firefighting. How does this have anything to do with "chemtrails"? Persistent contrails or if you insist "chemtrails" are always observed at high altitudes, not the low altitude in the picture. They are also observed coming from the engines (exactly where the jet exhaust is, imagine that) and not from the belly of the plane. So again, how does this have anything to do with "chemtrails"? the only thing close in that article is the mention of weather modification which most likely refers to cloud seeding. In fact, I've found a few other sites that mention that as well http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/altss/printstory/local/12024 http://www.kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=4885840 Cloud seeding is nothing like a "chemtrail" or persistent contrail. The biggest difference of which is it takes place in previously existing clouds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding One thing to note, there are huge problems with spraying anything at 25,000-30,000 feet (instead of the low altitudes this system is designed for). First, it would be impossible to aim as any particulates could take at the least days and at the most months to reach the ground. Second, by the time it does reach the ground it will have dissipated to such low concentrations that one would be lucky to even be able to detect it. At such low concentration, it would be worthless. Finally, by the time it does reach the ground, it will have been exposed to so much sunlight that it will likely have become inert. Nobody would spray something like that from high altitudes. It just doesn't work. Thanks for the humor Jack. Edited April 21, 2008 by Matthew Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now