Chemtrails are back!

[Jack White]

No chemtrails today or yesterday over FW.

Jack

[Evan Burton]

And another day where Jack will not say if the images that "defy explanation" ever shown to a meteorologist, nor if airborne samples were collected in order to verify the composition of so-called "chemtrails".

[Evan Burton]

[Jack White]

When I arose this morning at 6:30 and went out to get the newspaper, I noticed two chemplanes in the east

(in the vicinity of Dallas) spraying parallel trails into a deep blue sky. I did not have my camera. When I returned

outside about 45 minutes later, high winds aloft had moved the chemtrails I had observed earlier about 30 miles

westward to just over my house, and converted them into cirrus-like clouds which covered a large portion of

the sky. The chemplanes were still active over Dallas. I went inside for my camera and photographed the

cirrus clouds which had been created, as well as the new trails in the east. I will post these later in the day.

If I had a time-lapse camera on a tripod, it would have caught definitive proof that chemtrails morph into

cirrus clouds. By 8:30 the cirrus cloud had been blown westward and the sky was blue again except for

two chemplanes in other areas of the sky firing short bursts to make smaller "cirrus clouds".

I suggest that TIME LAPSE PHOTOGRAPHY is the way to expose the methodology of the chemplanes.

Jack

[Matthew Lewis]

Except NOBODY disputes that persistent contrails will turn into cirrus clouds.

What you and others still have yet to prove is that theses trails are anything other than contrails. How did you know these were "chemplanes" and not normal commercial traffic? Did you compare their flight paths with an tracking program like Flight Aware or Flight Explorer? How do you know they were "chemtrails" when persistent contrails look exactly the same? Did you do ANYTHING besides rely on proven LIE that contrails must always dissipate? Do you deny that persistent contrails exist despite the 70+ years of science and observations supporting them?

Edited June 27, 2010 by Matthew Lewis

[Jack White]

Here are the "cirrus-like" clouds I had seen laid as chemtrails 45 minutes earlier about 30 miles eastward which were

moved rapidly westward by high winds aloft. The winds aloft were east to west; surface winds were south to north.

An hour or so later all the clouds had disappeared to the west. A stop-motion film would have shown the expansion

of the chemtrails into these "cirrus" clouds.

Jack

[Evan Burton]

Did you take note of the time, position and direction of flight?

Did you check with ATC to ascertain what the type, altitude, direction / flight route, registration and destination of the aircraft was?

Did you check with a meteorologist to ask what condition existed at that time and if they were favorable to the formation of contrails?

[Jack White]

No chemtrails for several days. Nothing but rain from Hurricane Alex coming ashore.

Jack

[Jack White]

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=24330#post24330

[Matthew Lewis]

Interesting article. It starts off with the lie that contrails should always dissipate after second or minutes. If this were always true then clouds could never exist. Do you believe this lie Jack?

It spends a lot of time talking about cloud seeding but "chemtrails" is not that. Cloud seeding takes place within established clouds. "Chemtrails" can create clouds but not the type capable of producing rain. They can turn into cirrus clouds (not capable of rain)and often only do so when there are already other cirrus clouds present (aka conditions already conducive to contrail formation).

I found it humorous how they took the STUDENT project 2025 (of which the "Owning the Weather" section is only a small part) which doesn't reflect policy and assume it is all happening or even possible. You should really look at the entire project sometime. All of it was a student project. A lot of it is not possible.

More humorous though were the "images provided by a former meteorologist at the Ontario Weather Service, showing spraying schemes for Europe." The guy behind those images used to post at a very lightly moderated (almost non-existent really) forum called godlikeproductions.com. Over the course of a few months he would post those "chemtrail" prediction maps. Then he collected the reports from other posters when they would see "chemtrails" exactly where he said they would be. The "problem" is all he posted were predictions of high level moisture or in other words, where contrails would be expected to form. He even admitted as such but the admissions were looked at as "they" got to him even though he continued to post his images afterward that believers continued to accept. Looks like his work is still attracting those willing to believe in anything.

Edit to add: Where are the tests on samples collected from directly within a trail? They've been promised for more than 10 years now. Why avoid getting the single biggest piece of evidence that could possibly collect? Unless they know they won't find anything anyway?

Edited July 31, 2010 by Matthew Lewis

[Kevin M. West]

Hey Jack, this is a discussion forum. If you are just going to post your observations and never discuss, start a blog.

[Steven Gaal]

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=24330#post24330

_________________________

worst in 50 years....Russia

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-08-05/russia-drought-may-lift-inflation-state-economy-role.html

[Jack White]

Chemtrails were very active over Fort Worth today, going in numerous directions, then transforming into

cirrus clouds.

Jack

[Craig Lamson]

Chemtrails were very active over Fort Worth today, going in numerous directions, then transforming into

cirrus clouds.

Jack

An imagination is very active in Fort Worth today, going in numerous directions and then transforming into silly posts on the internet....

[Matthew Lewis]

Since Jack apparently doesn't bother to answer direct questions, I have found his answer elsewhere

I asked this

It starts off with the lie that contrails should always dissipate after second or minutes. If this were always true then clouds could never exist. Do you believe this lie Jack?

I have previously on this forum backed up the above statement with science showing that the belief that contrails should dissipate quickly is indeed a lie.

Jack said this on another forum

Contrails evaporate quickly as the hot air cools. Chemtrails do not

vanish, but morph into cirrus clouds.

So apparently Jack does indeed believe the lie.

The following is research showing that it is indeed a lie.

Proof that contrails have been know to be persistent given the right conditions (in other words, they don't always dissipate) since 1942

http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1942/naca-wr-l-474.pdf

An interesting post from another person on a completely unrelated forum that mentions proof from 1981 ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)

The Peterson Field Guide Series A Field Guide to the Atmosphere Houghton Mifflin Company 1981.

Has many interesting things about contrails in it.

Photograph page 132 Pl.145 V - Condensation trail from a jet plane that produces its shadow on a diffuse mass of ice crystals extending downward below the contrail and the sun.

(This shoots to hell the dark "chemtrail" BS chemtrailers try to pass and not only shows one in 1981 or earlier but also explains why the phenomenon occurs.

Photograph page 132 Pl.146 - The condensation trail of a jet plane that is growing where the moist air is supersaturated with the respect to ice. This show that the contrail is located below the thin streamers of ice.

This photo is the same as many posted by many chemtrailers that they claim can ONLY BE the result of "chemical spraying". But here we have an example from 1981 or earlier that shows these phenomenon were seen a full decade before claims of chemtrail spraying.

now for some text from page 137:

In this era of high-flying aircraft, condensation trails - contrails - are a commonly observed feature of the sky. Sometimes they are ephemeral and dissapate as quickly as they form; other times they persist and grow wide enough to cover a substantial portion of the sky with a sheet of cirrostratus. Sometimes they maintain their integrity as a line of cloud formed in the wake of the rapidly moving aircraft; at other times they develop a series of pendules from which streamers of precipitation are observed to fall.

Contrails are a fascinating subject for study, sufficiently complex to challenge the expert and sufficiently variable to intrigue the amateur observer. Properly understood they yield a wealth of information about the current state of affairs in the high atmosphere, where it is difficult to locate weather instruments. Observed systematically, as a function of time, contrail information is a valuable adjunct to forecasting the weather.

Many other examples and photos showing phenomenon claimed by chemtrailers as only being possible by nefarious ways. In text and photos from 1981 or earlier.

Basically this information shoots down most claims made by the chemtrailers. Shoots down and tramples in the earth.

The Peterson Field Guide Series was sponsored by the National Audubon Society.

Older movies showing persistent contrails ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065670/goofs

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066740/goofs

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044413/goofs

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057940/goofs

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068421/goofs

Newspaper articles describing spreading persistent contrails from the 40's 50's and 70's here ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)

http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/

Life magazine photos from the 40's and on showing persistent contrails ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)

http://contrailscience.com/life-magazine-contrail-photos/

Persistent contrails from 1940

http://contrailscience.com/fightercontrails-over-kent-1941/

Persistent contrails from 1967

http://contrailscience.com/thirty-contrails-forty-years-ago/

Pre WWII description of lingering contrails that turned to cirrus and showed rainbow colors (both things "chemtrail" believers say only happens with "chemtrails")

http://contrailscience.com/pre-wwii-contrails/

1991 photo of a pendulous contrail (or sawtooth as Jack called it in a previous post) with a short explanation of the cause

http://consci.s3.amazonaws.com//wp-content/uploads/1991-day-p47-2.jpg

Clouds before powered flight that look a lot like clouds "chemtrail" believers claim are man made

http://contrailscience.com/clouds-before-planes-cloud-studies-1905/

Any comments on the above Jack? Do you still believe the proven lie that contrails do not persist? What about the lie that they were never seen before the late 90's?

Why do some people think contrails never persisted before?

http://contrailscience.com/people-dont-notice-contrails/

In the above referenced link Jack also said this

Chemtrails are not from the engines, but from spray vents in the wings, releasing chemical and particulate matter into the air.

Why then Jack do the vast majority of photos claiming to show "chemtrails" show them coming directly from the engines?

Anything to say to any of this Jack? Or are you just going to continue using this thread as your personal blog?

Edited August 7, 2010 by Matthew Lewis