The skies over the midlands.

The Wild Goose · 21-10-2019 2:23pm #1

Does anyone else think it's weird what's going on in the skies over Longford, Cavan, and Westmeath areas today?
Each time I go outside I see another 3-4 planes flying over at high altitude.
Some days I might see nothing in the skies, but today it's an absolute blitz.
I would say that I've seen maybe 20-25 planes fly over my house in the five or six times I've been outside, all spewing out what I would consider to be chemtrails that linger in the sky long after the plane has disappeared over the horizon.

Now you may not believe that chemtrails exist but if so, answer me this.
Why would 50 planes (I've just looked out again and there's another three up there, so 50 is probably a conservative estimate!) fly over my house today when I live in a rural area that AFAIK is not on a recognised flight path and would normally have zero flyovers?

PS: I've looked out again and there's two more flying over...but strangely, one of them has zero emissions, as in no chemtrail, no vapour trail..nothing at all??

cfuserkildare · 21-10-2019 2:25pm

Try looking at

www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com

for in more info about Chemtrails.

Oops! · 21-10-2019 2:28pm

Weather man.... Weather. You can come up out of the bunker now.

The Wild Goose · 21-10-2019 5:07pm

Oops! wrote: »

Weather man.... Weather. You can come up out of the bunker now.

Do you mean that 50 planes flying over is a result of the weather?

Or...The weather is a result of the 50 planes flying over?

Note: only one of the above is plausible, as in..

The weather cannot cause 50 planes to fly over, however..
50 planes flying over could possibly affect the weather?

So I'm presuming you meant option two then.
Unless you meant that the only thing affecting the weather is weather, and chemtrails don't exist?
But this doesn't address the main thrust of the post, which is why 50 planes are flying over an area which normally has little or no air traffic?

Fortunately I'm not in a bunker. If I were I wouldn't be able to see the sky now would I?
Incidentally I've since noticed something else odd...
All the planes are flying in roughly the same direction ie. North-West.

Harry Palmr · 21-10-2019 5:21pm

You should look up more, a mix of Dublin, Frankfurt, Amsterdam traffic heading to North America

https://www.flightradar24.com/EIN60Y/228edc7a

Today's traffic movement since 10 am

https://www.flightradar24.com/2019-10-21/09:55/12x/51,-2/6

King Mob · 21-10-2019 5:36pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Now you may not believe that chemtrails exist but if so, answer me this.
Why would 50 planes (I've just looked out again and there's another three up there, so 50 is probably a conservative estimate!) fly over my house today when I live in a rural area that AFAIK is not on a recognised flight path and would normally have zero flyovers?

Chemtrails don't exist.

Why would 50 planes fly over your house in the conspiracy theory version?

Are they targeting you specifically?
Or just that part of the country?
Or is that the usual amount of coverage all over the world?

Dohnjoe · 21-10-2019 5:43pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Does anyone else think it's weird what's going on in the skies over Longford, Cavan, and Westmeath areas today?
Each time I go outside I see another 3-4 planes flying over at high altitude.
Some days I might see nothing in the skies, but today it's an absolute blitz.
I would say that I've seen maybe 20-25 planes fly over my house in the five or six times I've been outside, all spewing out what I would consider to be chemtrails that linger in the sky long after the plane has disappeared over the horizon.

Now you may not believe that chemtrails exist but if so, answer me this.
Why would 50 planes (I've just looked out again and there's another three up there, so 50 is probably a conservative estimate!) fly over my house today when I live in a rural area that AFAIK is not on a recognised flight path and would normally have zero flyovers?

PS: I've looked out again and there's two more flying over...but strangely, one of them has zero emissions, as in no chemtrail, no vapour trail..nothing at all??

Also

If true..

What chemicals are they spraying exactly?
What impact or effect do these chemicals have?
If they spray them at 20,000 feet they aren't going to touch the ground below, so why spray them so high?
These pilots don't mind chemicals being sprayed on the families, friends, coworkers?

And many, many more questions but we'll just stick to that lot for now

The Wild Goose · 21-10-2019 6:58pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

You should look up more, a mix of Dublin, Frankfurt, Amsterdam traffic heading to North America

https://www.flightradar24.com/EIN60Y/228edc7a

Today's traffic movement since 10 am

https://www.flightradar24.com/2019-10-21/09:55/12x/51,-2/6

That's an interesting site you posted for me to view.
However it doesn't correlate with what I'm seeing in the sky?
I stayed outside for about 10 minutes when there was a large volume indicated on the map to be flying over my general area and I saw two planes. I realise they're not all flying over my house but I can see maybe 20-30 miles in each direction so I have a pretty big visual corridor.
Also there was a plane flying in the opposite direction (south-east) which was not shown on the map at all?

There's also around eight trails in the sky on a north-east south-west axis (think Belfast-Killarney) which must have occurred earlier when I was indoors, yet that doesn't seem to be a flight path occurring on the map?

If it's a case that only a small portion of the north-west air traffic is visible to me (as it would appear from the 10 minute spell I mentioned above), then the periods earlier today when I was seeing 3,4 and 5 planes at a time in the sky would mean there were actually staggering amounts of planes flying that route, I mean you'd be talking multiple hundreds per hour.
And yet I didn't see one plane flying in the opposite direction?

Perhaps it's the answer, but it still poses some other questions.
I'll revisit that site again over the next couple of days before making a judgement.

The Wild Goose · 21-10-2019 9:35pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Also

If true..

What chemicals are they spraying exactly?
What impact or effect do these chemicals have?
If they spray them at 20,000 feet they aren't going to touch the ground below, so why spray them so high?
These pilots don't mind chemicals being sprayed on the families, friends, coworkers?

And many, many more questions but we'll just stick to that lot for now

I don't have a load of letters after my name but I do observe and question, which is why I posted asking if others had observed a large concentration of aircraft in the sky today.
Perhaps you should do your own research and I'd suggest a good starting point might be:
Agenda 21
Any of the Climate Engineering Conferences over the last number of years
Geoengineering Proposals to deal with 'climate change'
climatechangeagenda.com

However bearing that in mind I will attempt to answer:

I don't know the chemical composition "exactly" but it would probably be a combination of aluminium and sulphate particles.

2nd & 3rd Questions together: They're not designed to fall to the ground, and to be effective would be released at an altitude nearer to 60,000 feet rather than 20,000. The effect is to create more cloud cover and block out direct sunlight, supposedly to counteract 'global warming'. Which leads to question 4..

If the pilots are being told by releasing these chemicals they're doing their bit for global warming would they be appeased, 'knowing' that they're saving the planet for future generations?
Then again maybe they don't even know.. maybe the chemicals are released on an altitude sensitive trigger switch?

What I do know is that I've seen the effects on numerous occasions conducive with the chemtrail theory, whereby a beautiful blue sky would become streaked with 'chemtrails', and shortly after would turn to a steely grey colour complete with misty rain.

What I also know is that "climate change" is covering for a multitude of sins. What I'd like to know is why the Green Party have so much to say about climate change, yet ZERO to say about 5G, mandatory Vaccinations, LED street lighting? I know cause I emailed them.
Maybe you could answer that one for me?

Dohnjoe · 21-10-2019 11:35pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

I don't have a load of letters after my name but I do observe and question, which is why I posted asking if others had observed a large concentration of aircraft in the sky today.
Perhaps you should do your own research and I'd suggest a good starting point might be:
Agenda 21
Any of the Climate Engineering Conferences over the last number of years
Geoengineering Proposals to deal with 'climate change'
climatechangeagenda.com

I do recommend questioning the agenda of those types of sites.

However bearing that in mind I will attempt to answer:

I don't know the chemical composition "exactly" but it would probably be a combination of aluminium and sulphate particles.

2nd & 3rd Questions together: They're not designed to fall to the ground, and to be effective would be released at an altitude nearer to 60,000 feet rather than 20,000. The effect is to create more cloud cover and block out direct sunlight, supposedly to counteract 'global warming'.

Airliners typically travel at an altitude of 30,000 feet to 40,000 feet.

How does this so-called cloud cover counteract global warming? excess clouds would exacerbate temperatures

If the pilots are being told by releasing these chemicals they're doing their bit for global warming would they be appeased, 'knowing' that they're saving the planet for future generations?

Then again maybe they don't even know.. maybe the chemicals are released on an altitude sensitive trigger switch?

This is speculation based on speculation which itself is based on speculation

What I do know is that I've seen the effects on numerous occasions conducive with the chemtrail theory, whereby a beautiful blue sky would become streaked with 'chemtrails', and shortly after would turn to a steely grey colour complete with misty rain.

They are contrails.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail

What I also know is that "climate change" is covering for a multitude of sins. What I'd like to know is why the Green Party have so much to say about climate change, yet ZERO to say about 5G, mandatory Vaccinations, LED street lighting? I know cause I emailed them.
Maybe you could answer that one for me?

Thanks for the answers

I would recommend paying attention to the consensus of real scientists, doctors and medical professionals over woo merchants who sell alarmism and magic healing water

King Mob · 22-10-2019 1:24am

The Wild Goose wrote: »

What I do know is that I've seen the effects on numerous occasions conducive with the chemtrail theory, whereby a beautiful blue sky would become streaked with 'chemtrails', and shortly after would turn to a steely grey colour complete with misty rain.

How do you tell the difference between a chemtrail and a contrail?

bassy · 22-10-2019 2:17am

I would say theres wacky dal trails coming out of your house

tuxy · 22-10-2019 4:26am

King Mob wrote: »

How do you tell the difference between a chemtrail and a contrail?

No difference, contrails are made up of chemicals(chemtrails). Mainly dihydrogen monoxide vapor.

King Mob · 22-10-2019 4:38am

tuxy wrote: »

No difference, contrails are made up of chemicals(chemtrails). Mainly dihydrogen monoxide vapor.

Dihydrogen Monoxide! I hear that causes metals to rust!

Ipso · 22-10-2019 5:54am

King Mob wrote: »

Dihydrogen Monoxide! I hear that causes metals to rust!

Thousands of people die every year due to over exposure.

22-10-2019 6:29am

It's true,
When. I was a young lad I did work experience in Dublin airport.
One of my jobs was filling the planes with chemicals just before they took off.
It was like a petrol pump just out of sight of the public.
It was 79p a liter and the pilot would get 30/40 pound worth, some of the English pilots would say "fill 'er up mate" and get 60/70pounds worth.

kippy · 22-10-2019 6:35am

Chemtrails are hugely inefficient so they don't use them any more.
Irish Water got that tender a few years ago and add small doses of Barium to the water supply to help control the masses. Much more efficient than chemtrail dispersal.

Wanderer78 · 22-10-2019 6:39am

Ffs folks, gets some hobbies, before you fry your brains

22-10-2019 9:41am

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Do you mean that 50 planes flying over is a result of the weather?

Or...The weather is a result of the 50 planes flying over?

Note: only one of the above is plausible, as in..

The weather cannot cause 50 planes to fly over, however..
50 planes flying over could possibly affect the weather?

So I'm presuming you meant option two then.
Unless you meant that the only thing affecting the weather is weather, and chemtrails don't exist?
But this doesn't address the main thrust of the post, which is why 50 planes are flying over an area which normally has little or no air traffic?

Fortunately I'm not in a bunker. If I were I wouldn't be able to see the sky now would I?
Incidentally I've since noticed something else odd...
All the planes are flying in roughly the same direction ie. North-West.

North Atlantic Tracks

Commercial flights all go along corridors. This makes it easier for ATC on each side if all flights are on one path. These can change depending on weather etc. This explains your confusion about 50 planes suddenly being above your house.
I have no idea why you think the weather couldn't cause 50 planes to fly over your house, unless you are totally unaware of flight corridors, which makes no sense for someone knowledgeable about the flights.

In your first post, you state that you don't live on a flight path. Considering that is clearly not the case, isn't it more likely that you're just not on a frequently used one?

There could even be some random military use of airspace causing flights to go around that area.

The Wild Goose wrote: »

If the pilots are being told by releasing these chemicals they're doing their bit for global warming would they be appeased, 'knowing' that they're saving the planet for future generations?
Then again maybe they don't even know.. maybe the chemicals are released on an altitude sensitive trigger switch?

You have just included I'd say well over a million people in your conspiracy. Designers, engineers, builders, testers, pilots, maintenance, air crash forensics etc. over the course of decades.

The Wild Goose wrote: »

What I do know is that I've seen the effects on numerous occasions conducive with the chemtrail theory, whereby a beautiful blue sky would become streaked with 'chemtrails', and shortly after would turn to a steely grey colour complete with misty rain.

"This is Ireland! We don't have changeable weather! It doesn't go from sunny to cloudy in an afternoon! Conspiracy!"

The Wild Goose wrote: »

I don't have a load of letters after my name but I do observe and question

No, you don't.

Bob Harris · 22-10-2019 9:48am

Most of the time it's cloudy where you live so you don't see them. When they produce chemtrails it's obvious they are there. When they don't it's not that easy to see a plane at 30000ft. As mentioned above the traffic may be increased due to different flight corridors being used.

'chemtrails' as you call them will only be visible in certain atmospheric conditions so they won't always be visible. You may see one plane producing them and another not producing them in the same sky. Altitude would be one explanation for this.

I'd keep the tinfoil hat on though and the gas mask at the ready.

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 10:22am

Oh Wow!
I don't even know where to begin...

Well first off, I see that NOBODY addressed the Green Party issue?
Now that's a strange one, because the Green Party are supposed to be all about protecting the environment and saving the planet yet have nothing to say about 5G?
Not a word on their website, despite the fact that 180 scientists and doctors recently presented a petition to the EU asking for a moratorium on the roll-out of 5G until independent testing was done on the potential health risks.
And not a word about LED street lighting either.
The Barcelona Institute for World Health combined with Exeter University produced a 3 year study which concluded that people living in areas of LED street lighting have 1.5 times the likelihood of contacting breast cancer and twice the likelihood of contacting prostate cancer.
When direct contact was made enquiring about their stance on these issues it was ignored. But apparently nobody here thinks that's odd or questionable?

@ Dohnjoe
Agenda 21
Any of the Climate Engineering Conferences over the last number of years
Geoengineering Proposals to deal with 'climate change'
climatechangeagenda.com

"I do recommend questioning the agenda of those types of sites."

Those type of sites?? Do you even know what Agenda 21 is?
Agenda 21 is not a "site"
Neither are Climate Engineering Conferences or Geoengineering Proposals "sites"

You quote Wikipedia as your source of information?
Wikipedia is not an unbiased source of information, and is well known for pushing the official agenda regarding any contentious issues. Check out 9/11 on Wikipedia, or better still type "5G health concerns" into their search engine and see what you come up with.

"I would recommend paying attention to the consensus of real scientists, doctors and medical professionals over woo merchants who sell alarmism and magic healing water"
Well 180 of them put their names to a petition which is being ignored by the party who "want to save the environment". What about you? What have you done apart from checking Wikipedia?
I rang the Dept. of Communications numerous times asking one simple question:
"Is 5G currently being rolled out in Ireland".
Nobody there would give a definitive answer, so the Dept. of Communications could not communicate on a communications query?

Do you know where the term "conspiracy theory" originated?
It was created by the CIA in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination in order to discredit any questioning of the official narrative.

Now fortunately I have a life to live. I have about six other people hitting on me, which I don't mind but will have to address later.
In the meantime, would anyone like to comment on the Green party/5G situation? Just askin'..

o1s1n · 22-10-2019 10:35am

The Wild Goose wrote: »

PS: I've looked out again and there's two more flying over...but strangely, one of them has zero emissions, as in no chemtrail, no vapour trail..nothing at all??

Planes fly at different altitudes.

The formation of contrails is dependent on the temperature and humidity at the altitude the plane is flying at.

It's simple science really.

Bob Harris · 22-10-2019 10:37am

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Oh Wow!

Well first off, I see that NOBODY addressed the Green Party issue?
Now that's a strange one, because the Green Party are supposed to be all about protecting the environment and saving the planet yet have nothing to say about 5G?
And not a word about LED street lighting either.
The Barcelona Institute for World Health combined with Exeter University produced a 3 year study which concluded that people living in areas of LED street lighting have 1.5 times the likelihood of contacting breast cancer and twice the likelihood of contacting prostate cancer.
When direct contact was made enquiring about their stance on these issues it was ignored. But apparently nobody here thinks that's odd or questionable?

Do you know where the term "conspiracy theory" originated?
It was created by the CIA in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination in order to discredit any questioning of the official narrative.

Now fortunately I have a life to live. I have about six other people hitting on me, which I don't mind but will have to address later.
In the meantime, would anyone like to comment on the Green party/5G situation? Just askin'..

You're gone off on a bit of a tangent there OP.

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 12:36pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Oh Wow!
I don't even know where to begin...

Well first off, I see that NOBODY addressed the Green Party issue?
Now that's a strange one, because the Green Party are supposed to be all about protecting the environment and saving the planet yet have nothing to say about 5G?
Not a word on their website, despite the fact that 180 scientists and doctors recently presented a petition to the EU asking for a moratorium on the roll-out of 5G until independent testing was done on the potential health risks.
And not a word about LED street lighting either.
The Barcelona Institute for World Health combined with Exeter University produced a 3 year study which concluded that people living in areas of LED street lighting have 1.5 times the likelihood of contacting breast cancer and twice the likelihood of contacting prostate cancer.
When direct contact was made enquiring about their stance on these issues it was ignored. But apparently nobody here thinks that's odd or questionable?

@ Dohnjoe
Agenda 21
Any of the Climate Engineering Conferences over the last number of years
Geoengineering Proposals to deal with 'climate change'
climatechangeagenda.com

"I do recommend questioning the agenda of those types of sites."

Those type of sites?? Do you even know what Agenda 21 is?
Agenda 21 is not a "site"
Neither are Climate Engineering Conferences or Geoengineering Proposals "sites"

You quote Wikipedia as your source of information?
Wikipedia is not an unbiased source of information, and is well known for pushing the official agenda regarding any contentious issues. Check out 9/11 on Wikipedia, or better still type "5G health concerns" into their search engine and see what you come up with.

"I would recommend paying attention to the consensus of real scientists, doctors and medical professionals over woo merchants who sell alarmism and magic healing water"
Well 180 of them put their names to a petition which is being ignored by the party who "want to save the environment". What about you? What have you done apart from checking Wikipedia?
I rang the Dept. of Communications numerous times asking one simple question:
"Is 5G currently being rolled out in Ireland".
Nobody there would give a definitive answer, so the Dept. of Communications could not communicate on a communications query?

Do you know where the term "conspiracy theory" originated?
It was created by the CIA in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination in order to discredit any questioning of the official narrative.

Now fortunately I have a life to live. I have about six other people hitting on me, which I don't mind but will have to address later.
In the meantime, would anyone like to comment on the Green party/5G situation? Just askin'..

This thread is about contrails. The wiki article I posted about contrails is sourced and can be compared to any scientific or meteorological source on them.

There's no evidence for "secret chemicals being sprayed en masse from airliners to combat climate change"

For 5G, Led lights and the other stuff, feel free to create separate threads

King Mob · 22-10-2019 1:52pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Oh Wow!
I don't even know where to begin...

Well first off, I see that NOBODY addressed the Green Party issue?
Now that's a strange one, because the Green Party are supposed to be all about protecting the environment and saving the planet yet have nothing to say about 5G?
Not a word on their website, despite the fact that 180 scientists and doctors recently presented a petition to the EU asking for a moratorium on the roll-out of 5G until independent testing was done on the potential health risks.
And not a word about LED street lighting either.
The Barcelona Institute for World Health combined with Exeter University produced a 3 year study which concluded that people living in areas of LED street lighting have 1.5 times the likelihood of contacting breast cancer and twice the likelihood of contacting prostate cancer.
When direct contact was made enquiring about their stance on these issues it was ignored. But apparently nobody here thinks that's odd or questionable?

@ Dohnjoe
Agenda 21
Any of the Climate Engineering Conferences over the last number of years
Geoengineering Proposals to deal with 'climate change'
climatechangeagenda.com

"I do recommend questioning the agenda of those types of sites."

Those type of sites?? Do you even know what Agenda 21 is?
Agenda 21 is not a "site"
Neither are Climate Engineering Conferences or Geoengineering Proposals "sites"

You quote Wikipedia as your source of information?
Wikipedia is not an unbiased source of information, and is well known for pushing the official agenda regarding any contentious issues. Check out 9/11 on Wikipedia, or better still type "5G health concerns" into their search engine and see what you come up with.

"I would recommend paying attention to the consensus of real scientists, doctors and medical professionals over woo merchants who sell alarmism and magic healing water"
Well 180 of them put their names to a petition which is being ignored by the party who "want to save the environment". What about you? What have you done apart from checking Wikipedia?
I rang the Dept. of Communications numerous times asking one simple question:
"Is 5G currently being rolled out in Ireland".
Nobody there would give a definitive answer, so the Dept. of Communications could not communicate on a communications query?

Do you know where the term "conspiracy theory" originated?
It was created by the CIA in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination in order to discredit any questioning of the official narrative.

Now fortunately I have a life to live. I have about six other people hitting on me, which I don't mind but will have to address later.
In the meantime, would anyone like to comment on the Green party/5G situation? Just askin'..

But why would we bother to dive into any of that when you dont seem to be able to answer a very simple very basic question:
How do you tell the difference between contrails and chemtrails?

Ipso · 22-10-2019 1:53pm

Agenda 21is so 2015.

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 3:54pm

So the general consensus here is that chemtrails are a load of conspiracy tosh, right?
The video below is David Keith,
Professor of Applied Physics for Harvard University's Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Professor of Public Policy for the Harvard Kennedy School at Harvard University.
It was a presentation he did in 2009
So what do you think they have been up to in the ten years since, playing cribbage maybe?
And given his apparent unconcern with regard to the health implications, what do you think is actually discussed privately?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEBZAE0rbs

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 4:04pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

So the general consensus here is that chemtrails are a load of conspiracy tosh, right?
The video below is David Keith,
Professor of Applied Physics for Harvard University's Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Professor of Public Policy for the Harvard Kennedy School at Harvard University.
It was a presentation he did in 2009
So what do you think they have been up to in the ten years since, playing cribbage maybe?
And given his apparent unconcern with regard to the health implications, what do you think is actually discussed privately?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEBZAE0rbs

This took 5 seconds to find

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611682/how-one-climate-scientist-combats-threats-and-misinformation-from-chemtrail-conspiracists/

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 4:09pm

Just to clarify that post in case you didn't catch it...
He's asked about the health implications of dumping 10 megatons of aluminium into the atmosphere..
He doesn't balk at the idea, or even dispute the figures..
10 megatons equals 10 million tons! of aluminium.

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 4:16pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Just to clarify that post in case you didn't catch it...
He's asked about the health implications of dumping 10 megatons of aluminium into the atmosphere..
He doesn't balk at the idea, or even dispute the figures..
10 megatons equals 10 million tons! of aluminium.

Sorry you have supporting evidence of your conspiracy happening or you are imagining that it may be happening?

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 4:23pm

@Dohnjoe
Oh okay, so what he's filmed saying 10 years ago doesn't apply then. That's cool.
If you were making a talk about experimenting and someone dropped a figure of 10 million tons of aluminium into a question and the figure was outrageous would you not refute it no?

Although if Wikipedia says it's true and it's on the dodgy Agenda 21 website that would make it okay I suppose...

King Mob · 22-10-2019 4:37pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

So the general consensus here is that chemtrails are a load of conspiracy tosh, right?

Yes, because you can't seem to actually be able to tell the difference between normal contrails and chemtrails.

smurfjed · 22-10-2019 4:46pm

@The Wild Goose

The weather cannot cause 50 planes to fly over, however..

actually the reason that they would fly over a specific point is because of the weather, the tracks are chosen daily based on weather patterns, so if all of the aircraft are leaving UK airspace at one point and heading to a specific atlantic airspace entry point, then they will all fly the same way.

All the planes are flying in roughly the same direction ie. North-West.

Same reason.

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 4:57pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

@Dohnjoe
Oh okay, so what he's filmed saying 10 years ago doesn't apply then. That's cool.
If you were making a talk about experimenting and someone dropped a figure of 10 million tons of aluminium into a question and the figure was outrageous would you not refute it no?

Although if Wikipedia says it's true and it's on the dodgy Agenda 21 website that would make it okay I suppose...

Do you have any supporting evidence of your conspiracy theory? names, details, etc?

o1s1n · 22-10-2019 4:57pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

So the general consensus here is that chemtrails are a load of conspiracy tosh, right?

Let me throw that one back at you, do you believe they are real?

What purpose do they serve?

Who is responsible for them?

How has a worldwide conspiracy of this magnitude been orchestrated for this one task, which would need to involve thousands upon thousands of people, without one journalist somewhere blowing the whole thing wide open?

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 5:07pm

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, because you can't seem to actually be able to tell the difference between normal contrails and chemtrails.

So when three planes flew overhead yesterday within the space of about a minute:
One emitted no contrail at all
One emitted what I would regard as a standard contrail, where it was visible for maybe 20 seconds
The third one emitted "contrails" which although eventually dispersing were still clearly visible an hour later. They didn't evaporate or dissipate or whatever normal trails do after a short time, they just spread.

So I suppose they were at different altitudes right? Except to the naked eye they were at roughly the same altitude simply because the planes looked the same size? Not accurate I know but certainly an indication..

So for arguments sake let's just say they were all at a similar altitude, if so then why the huge difference in "comtrails" then?

King Mob · 22-10-2019 5:12pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

So when three planes flew overhead yesterday within the space of about a minute:
One emitted no contrail at all
One emitted what I would regard as a standard contrail, where it was visible for maybe 20 seconds
The third one emitted "contrails" which although eventually dispersing were still clearly visible an hour later. They didn't evaporate or dissipate or whatever normal trails do after a short time, they just spread.

I asked you to explain the difference between contrails and chemtrails.
But your answer is a bit unclear.

It seems that you believe that the difference is that contrails dissipate quickly while chemtrail trails do not?
Is this a correct summary?
Is this the ONLY difference, or are their others?

You seem to understand the rational explanation quite well, so I'm not sure why you are asking me a question you've already answered.
The planes were at different heights.

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 5:13pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

So when three planes flew overhead yesterday within the space of about a minute:
One emitted no contrail at all
One emitted what I would regard as a standard contrail, where it was visible for maybe 20 seconds
The third one emitted "contrails" which although eventually dispersing were still clearly visible an hour later. They didn't evaporate or dissipate or whatever normal trails do after a short time, they just spread.

So I suppose they were at different altitudes right? Except to the naked eye they were at roughly the same altitude simply because the planes looked the same size? Not accurate I know but certainly an indication..

So for arguments sake let's just say they were all at a similar altitude, if so then why the huge difference in "comtrails" then?

Info here
http://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/

Some planes in the sky leave trails that persist and spread, and other planes, in the same sky, leave short-lived trails, or no trails at all.

These trails are actually called contrails, short for “condensation trails”. They are not smoke from the engines, they are formed when the water in jet engine exhaust (and there’s quite a lot of it, like car exhaust on a cold day) mixes with wet cold air and condenses and freezes into ice crystals. Contrails are actually a type of cirrus cloud. When the air is wet and cold enough the trails can stay around for a long time, and sometimes spread out.

This difference between trails that fade away, and trails that spread, is often used as evidence of the “chemtrail” theory, which states that the longer lasting trails (or some of them) are being deliberately manipulated for some reason. So you see helpful images like this.

But this is wrong. Contrails can fade away, and contrails can persist and spread. It depends on the air they are formed in.

Now there are two main reasons why some planes leave trails and some nearby planes do not. The less common reason is that different planes have different engines. Some engines will leave a contrail in the air where another engine will not. Here, for example, are an Airbus A340 (maiden flight: 1991) on the left, leaving contrails, and a Boeing 707 (maiden flight: 1957) not leaving contrails. Both are flying at 33,000 feet (part of a German test to study contrail formation), but the exhaust of the newer engines of the A340 is at a lower temperature, and so makes contrails in a wider range of conditions*.

smurfjed · 22-10-2019 5:48pm

dissipate quickly while chemtrail trails do not?

But if the Chemtrails are not dissipating, what is the purpose of using this method for wide area chemical spreading?

tuxy · 22-10-2019 6:14pm

smurfjed wrote: »

But if the Chemtrails are not dissipating, what is the purpose of using this method for wide area chemical spreading?

David Keith has been researching the possibility of spraying chemicals into the atmosphere to reflect some of the sunlight and cool the earth. This would probably require the mixture not to spread too much.
It's still a theory that needs much more research and the man seems very frustrated by the damage conspiracy theorists are doing to his research.
He had hoped to release some air balloons this year to record more data for this research but I don't believe this has been approved yet.

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 6:15pm

smurfjed wrote: »

But if the Chemtrails are not dissipating, what is the purpose of using this method for wide area chemical spreading?

Because..
pauses
invents answer
answer becomes fact

"the particles are released from the plane in long plumes, these then disperse to form a haze which is creating artificial cloud cover that stops global warming"

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 6:15pm

In between firing questions at me, has anyone actually viewed the video I posted a link to? Y/N?

It's difficult to answer 5-6 people at one time who are all posting questions.
King Mob for example comes to the conclusion that the planes were at different heights even though he didn't see them, and discounts my opinion that they appeared to be at roughly the same altitude?

I'd be happy to answer o1sIn in more detail which would require more time, but the answers to the 1st, 2nd and part of the 3rd questions he poses are in the video?

I've had to discount any further posts from Dohnjoe when I discovered he thought Agenda 21 was a dodgy website as opposed to an agenda singed by 179 nations.

Everyone seems fixated with me answering questions about the validity/composition of chemtrails.
Yet nobody seems bothered that a Harvard scientist ten years ago gives a presentation which includes dispersing ten million tons of aluminium into the atmosphere by plane?
What gives guys? Does the fact that someone in authority would even contemplate that not bother you?

tuxy · 22-10-2019 6:22pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Everyone seems fixated with me answering questions about the validity/composition of chemtrails.
Yet nobody seems bothered that a Harvard scientist ten years ago gives a presentation which includes dispersing ten million tons of aluminium into the atmosphere by plane?

This scientist is still trying to release air balloons to test his theory on a tiny scale. If there was a wide scale operation involving jet planes why is he wasting his time trying to to get a few balloons released? Can't he just look up and think, job done!

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 6:25pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

I've had to discount any further posts from Dohnjoe when I discovered he thought Agenda 21 was a dodgy website as opposed to an agenda singed by 179 nations.

Nope

You posted one website
http://climatechangeagenda.com/

Which is a crank conspiracy website

To which I politely replied

"I do recommend questioning the agenda of those types of sites. "

It takes 30 seconds to find information on contrails and why some disperse and why some don't. So here it is again.
http://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/

smurfjed · 22-10-2019 7:09pm

I believe that this is a must for any discussion on Chemtrails.

The Wild Goose · 22-10-2019 7:10pm

tuxy wrote: »

This scientist is still trying to release air balloons to test his theory on a tiny scale. If there was a wide scale operation involving jet planes why is he wasting his time trying to to get a few balloons released? Can't he just look up and think, job done!

Do you believe everything you see and hear?
10 years ago he's talking about how easy it would be using planes to disperse 10 million tons of aluminium into the atmosphere.
10 years on and he's hoping to stick up a couple of balloons??
Are you serious? It must be true because he says so, right?
If you believe that you might be interested in a seaside property I'm selling in Cavan...

The mere fact that you don't think it's crazy for someone to even contemplate doing that shows how indoctrinated and controlled we've become as a species and how our perceptions have been manipulated.
In a rational society the guy would be confined to a padded cell.

kippy · 22-10-2019 8:01pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

In between firing questions at me, has anyone actually viewed the video I posted a link to? Y/N?

It's difficult to answer 5-6 people at one time who are all posting questions.
King Mob for example comes to the conclusion that the planes were at different heights even though he didn't see them, and discounts my opinion that they appeared to be at roughly the same altitude?

I'd be happy to answer o1sIn in more detail which would require more time, but the answers to the 1st, 2nd and part of the 3rd questions he poses are in the video?

I've had to discount any further posts from Dohnjoe when I discovered he thought Agenda 21 was a dodgy website as opposed to an agenda singed by 179 nations.

Everyone seems fixated with me answering questions about the validity/composition of chemtrails.
Yet nobody seems bothered that a Harvard scientist ten years ago gives a presentation which includes dispersing ten million tons of aluminium into the atmosphere by plane?
What gives guys? Does the fact that someone in authority would even contemplate that not bother you?

I told you earlier in this thread.
The state doesn't use chemtrails any more for mass population control. Once we had the last bust, the OGP (https://ogp.gov.ie/) relaised that spreading mind acontrol chemicals from planes was extremely inefficient.
A tender was created and Irish Water won the bid. They essentially disperse these chemicals in the water system as its far more efficient, cheaper, and they put chemicals in the water already.

Dohnjoe · 22-10-2019 8:20pm

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Do you believe everything you see and hear?
10 years ago he's talking about how easy it would be using planes to disperse 10 million tons of aluminium into the atmosphere.
10 years on and he's hoping to stick up a couple of balloons??
Are you serious? It must be true because he says so, right?
If you believe that you might be interested in a seaside property I'm selling in Cavan...

The mere fact that you don't think it's crazy for someone to even contemplate doing that shows how indoctrinated and controlled we've become as a species and how our perceptions have been manipulated.
In a rational society the guy would be confined to a padded cell.

What do you think of the popular conspiracy that claims airliners have been criss-crossing every country, deliberately spraying everyone below with mind-controlling chemicals for decades?

Don't you find it odd that your conspiracy is just a more up-to-date version of that one?

With the common denominator being contrails to both.

cnocbui · 22-10-2019 8:50pm

OP - did you breath test the chem trails?

one world order · 22-10-2019 8:58pm

Whistleblower Kirsten Meghan who worked for the US airforce gives a good inside view of the chemtrails. Unfortunately on this site no matter how much evidence there is for Chemtrails there will be those that deny no matter what, resorting to saying conspiracy theory, tinfoil hat etc. The realisation that the world is being controlled by evil working behind the scenes and you are just one of many that is being manipulated by the mass produced mainstream media is too much for some around here.

kippy · 22-10-2019 9:08pm

one world order wrote: »

Whistleblower Kirsten Meghan who worked for the US airforce gives a good inside view of the chemtrails. Unfortunately on this site no matter how much evidence there is for Chemtrails there will be those that deny no matter what, resorting to saying conspiracy theory, tinfoil hat etc. The realisation that the world is being controlled by evil working behind the scenes and you are just one of many that is being manipulated by the mass produced mainstream media is too much for some around here.

I've been around a fair while. And I know there are much easier and less obvious ways to 'control the world by evil working behind the scenes' than by spreading chemicals in very obvious and visible contrails that everyone can see.

The skies over the midlands.

Comments