1. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    Here is a patent for chemtrail given to Hughes. US patent #5003186 Google it and look at the actual patent for adding 10 micron sized Aluminum Oxide to jet fuel. No need for aerosols, straight dispersal from exhaust. The purpose of this substance is to reflect infared spectrum heating from the sun into space to mitigate global warming. I would like to hear any input on whether there is a HAARP connection in respect to weather modification. Some strange radar images accompany storms, with clear organized design appear. Using HAARP to agitate the atmosphere where this micron sized metallic material is, would be not hard to imagine. Hope the NSA doesn't see this as some threat to national security, but only interested curiosity.
  2. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Yep - it is well known - http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5003186.html - "Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming "

    So if this was in use you'd be able to check a/c fuel or exhaust and find these, or take air samples and find them too.

    so far no-one has - perhaps you could be the first??
  3. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    I agree on the fuel samples, but disagree on the air samples. The fact is that there is so much aluminum in earth's crust that gets blown around as dust that scientists who study aeolian dust use aluminum as a standard with which to compare other elements in the air. They use the ratio of the other element to aluminum, it is so common. The reason for my disagreement is because even if 20 million tons of aluminum oxide were being released, you probably could not identify it against the background of aluminum in ordinary dust!

    One further point unregistered should become aware of is that if a stratospheric seeding program as described in the patent were being used, you would not see a distinct linear trail that hangs and lingers for hours in the troposphere. You would probably see nothing at all behind the airplane, and the airplane would probably be much higher, well up into the stratosphere, because desite what the patent says:

    "The greenhouse gases are typically in the earth's stratosphere at an altitude of
    seven to thirteen kilometers. This suggests that the particle seeding should be done
    at an altitude on the order of 10 kilometers."​

    The stratosphere starts at 11 kilometers at the poles, and 17 kilometers at the equator!

    So, the patent is defective in that regard, and the correct altitude for "stratospheric" seeding would be up into the stratosphere, maybe 20 kilometers or ~60,000 ft altitude at a minimum. That is nearly wice the altitude of the airplanes being photographed as making "chemtrails".

    Here's an assignment for you, unregistered, how many large bodied jets like you see in all the "chemtrail" photos can make it up to 60,000 feet?

    Lastly, if the trails currently being claimed to be composed of aluminum oxide were to exist, and remain intact for hours, they would be composed of reflective particulate matter in a linear form that would be very visible on radar, they would be seen on radar to form at a high rate of speed equal to the aircraft, and to have the exact form on the radar of what you visibly see.
    That simply isn't happening, is it?

    Don't get me started on running aluminum oxide sandpaper through a jet engine, a sure recipe for disaster......
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Show the "strange radar images".
    They won't be strange at all.

    How could an ionospheric heater like haarp "agitate" the atmosphere at flight altitude in the troposphere?
    It cannot do so.

    And BTW, Despite what Francis Mangels claimed, Carl Von Welsbach never owned this patent, he died in 1929!

    Furthermore, despite what Michael J. Murphy, Francis Mangels, and even the great "climate researcher" Dane Wigington say,
    there is no "Welsbach" signature of aluminum, barium and strontium in this patent, the so-called "Welsbach" patent makes no mention of either barium or strontium, and NONE of those elements are "Welsbach" materials, though thorium is, and it is quite radioactive!
  5. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    I was thinking more that alleged specific size of the material would be a signature that could be checked for.

    I have no idea how it would be done, or whether it would show up something ......but for me it might be a "point of difference" between an atmosphere that has this working in it and one that does not.
  6. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Well, commercial nanoparticles, which are prohibitively expensive for a 20 million ton project, could be in a range of sizes and shapes:

    But then you've got ordinary volcanic ash which produces basically the same stuff:

    And fly ash from a coal boiler looks about the same:

    You could have all three and hardly tell which is which, plus you will have pollen, marine aerosols, biological material and various minerals in crystalline and non-crystalline form.

    To point the finger and distinguish one from the other would require an aerosol forensic specialist with some fancy equipment!
  7. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

  8. scombrid

    scombrid Senior Member

  9. TWCobra

    TWCobra Senior Member

  10. TWCobra

    TWCobra Senior Member

  11. Steve Funk

    Steve Funk Active Member

    Here is another passage from Prof. James Fleming's book, "Fixing the Sky, The Checkered History of Weather and Climate Control."
  12. Palli

    Palli New Member

    I borrowed this from another debate and think it is great if you take a look at this. It is very long but provides many answers about this with chemtrails.

    1225521 - May 8, 1917 - Protection From Poisonous Gas in Warfare
    Referenced in 4704942 - Charged aerosol
    "A method of defending against a warfare cloud of toxic aerosol utilizer
    a charged defensive aerosol wooden sprayed into the cloud.
    The defensive aerosol is made of a defensive agent
    Which may be chemically or biologically active. "

    1302332 - April 29, 1919-Toy Machine Gun - FV Du Pont
    Referenced in - 4141274 wooden for a smoke generator,
    Which evolved into the particle and aerosol devices in use today.

    1338343 - April 27, 1920 - Process And Apparatus For The Production of Intense Artificial Clouds, Fogs, or Mists
    1619183 - March 1, 1927 - Process of Producing Smoke Clouds From Moving Aircraft
    1631753 - June 7, 1927 - Electric Heater - Referenced in 3990987
    1665267 - April 10, 1928 - Process of Producing Artificial Fogs

    1892132 - December 27, 1932 - atomizing Attachment For Airplane Engine EXHAUST
    1928963 - October 3, 1933 - Electrical System And Method
    1957075 - May 1, 1934 - Airplane Spray Equipment
    2097581 - November 2, 1937 - Electric Stream Generator - Referenced in 3990987
    2409201 - October 15, 1946 - Smoke Producing Mixture
    2476171 - July 18, 1945 - Smoke Screen Generator

    2480967 - September 6, 1949 - Aerial Discharge Device
    2550324 - April 24, 1951 - Process For Controlling Weather
    2510867 - October 9, 1951 - Method of Crystal Formation and Precipitation
    2582678 - June 15, 1952 - Material Mina These Things Apparatus For Airplanes
    2591988 - April 8, 1952 - Production of TiO2 Pigments - Referenced in 3899144
    2614083 - October 14, 1952 - Metal Chloride Screening Smoke Mixture
    2633455 - March 31, 1953 - Smoke Generator
    2688069 - August 31, 1954 - Steam Generator - Referenced in 3990987
    2721495 - October 25, 1955 - Method And Apparatus For Detecting Minute Crystal Forming Particles Suspended in a gaseous Atmosphere
    2730402 - January 10, 1956 - Controllable Device dispersal
    2801322 - July 30, 1957 - Decomposition Chamber for Monopropellant Fuel - Referenced in 3990987
    2881335 - April 7, 1959 - Generation of Electrical Fields
    2908442 - October 13, 1959 - Method For Dispersing Natural Atmospheric Fogs And Clouds
    2986360 - May 30, 1962 - Aerial Insecticide Dusting Device
    2963975 - December 13, 1960 - Cloud Seeding Carbon Dioxide Bullet
    3126155 - March 24, 1964 - Silver Iodide Cloud Seeding Generator - Referenced in 3990987
    3127107 - March 31, 1964 - Generation of Ice-nucleating Crystals
    3131131 - April 28, 1964 - Electro Static Mixing in Microbial Conversions

    3174150 - March 16, 1965 - Self-Focusing Antenna System
    3234357 - February 8, 1966 - Electrically Heated Smoke Producing Device
    3274035 - September 20, 1966 - Metallic Composition For Production of hydroscopic Smoke
    3300721 ​​- January 24, 1967 - Means For Communication Through a Layer of Ionized Gases
    3313487 - April 11, 1967 - Cloud Seeding Apparatus
    3338476 - August 29, 1967 - Heating Device For Use With Aerosol Containers - Referenced in 3990987
    3410489 - November 12, 1968 - Automatically Adjustable Airfoil Spray System With Pump
    3429507 - February 25, 1969 - Rainmaker
    3432208 - November 7, 1967 - Fluidized Particle Dispenser
    3441214 - April 29, 1969 - Method And Apparatus For Seeding Clouds
    3445844 - May 20, 1969 - Trapped Electro Magnetic Radiation Communications System
    3456880 - July 22, 1969 - The Method Of Producing Precipitation From The Atmosphere
    3518670 June 30, 1970 - Artificial Ion Cloud
    3534906 - October 20, 1970 - Control of Atmospheric Particles
    3545677 - December 8, 1970 - Method of Cloud Seeding
    3564253 - February 16, 1971 - System And Method For Irradiation Of Planet Surface Areas
    3587966 - June 28, 1971 - Freezing nucleation
    3601312 - August 24, 1971 - Methods of Increasing The Likelihood oF Precipatation By The Artificial Introduction Of Sea Water Vapor Into The Atmosphere Winward Of An Air Lift Region
    3608810 - September 28, 1971 - Methods of Treating Atmospheric Conditions
    3608820 - September 20, 1971 - Treatment of Atmospheric Conditions by Intermittent Dispensing of Materials Therein
    3613992 - October 19, 1971 - Weather Modification Method
    3630950 - December 28, 1971 - Combustible Compositions For Generating Aerosols, Particularly Suitable For Cloud Modification And Weather Control And Aerosolization Process
    USRE29142 - This patent is a reissue of Patent US3630950 - Combustible compositions for generating aerosols, Particularly suitable for cloud modification and weather control and aerosolization process
    3659785 - December 8, 1971 - Weather Modification Utilizing microencapsulated Material
    3666176 - March 3, 1972 - Solar Temperature Inversion Device
    3677840 - July 18, 1972 - Pyrotechnics Comprising Oxide of Silver For Weather Modification Use
    3722183 - March 27, 1973 - Device For Clearing Impurities From The Atmosphere
    3769107 - October 30, 1973 - Pyrotechnic Composition For Generating Lead Based Smoke
    3784099 - January 8, 1974 - Air Pollution Control Method
    3785557 - January 15, 1974 - Cloud Seeding System
    3795626 - March 5, 1974 - Weather Modification Process
    3808595 - April 30, 1974 - Chaff Dispensing System
    3813875 - June 4, 1974 - Rocket Having Barium Release System to Create Ion Clouds In The Upper atmopsphere
    3835059 - September 10, 1974 - Methods of Generating Ice Nuclei Smoke Particles For Weather Modification And Apparatus Therefore
    3835293 - September 10, 1974 - Electrical Heating aparatus For Generating Super Heated Vapors - Referenced in 3990987
    3877642 - April 15, 1975 - Freezing Nucleant
    3882393 - May 6, 1975 - Communications System Utilizing Modulation Characteristic of The Polarization of The Ionosphere
    3896993 - July 29, 1975 - Process For Local Modification of Fog And Clouds For Triggering Their Precipitation hindering And For The Development of Hail Producing Clouds
    3899129 - August 12, 1975 - Apparatus for generating ice nuclei smoke particles for weather modification
    3899144 - August 12, 1975 - Powder contrail generation
    3940059 - February 24, 1976 - Method For Fog Dispersion
    3940060 - February 24, 1976 - Vortex Ring Generator
    3990987 - November 9, 1976 - Smoke generator
    3992628 - November 16, 1976 - countermeasure system for laser radiation
    3994437 - November 30, 1976 - Broadcast dissemination of trace quantities of biologically active chemicals
    4042196 - August 16, 1977 - Method and apparatus for triggering a considerate change in earth characteristics and measuring earth changes
    RE29, 142 - February 22, 1977 - Reissue of: 03,630,950 - Combustible compositions for generating aerosols, Particularly suitable for cloud modification and weather control and aerosolization process
    4035726 - July 12, 1977 - Method of controlling and / or improving high-latitude and other communications or radio wave surveillance systems by partial control of radio wave et al
    4096005 - June 20, 1978 - Pyrotechnic Cloud Seeding Composition
    4129252 - December 12, 1978 - Method and apparatus for production of seeding materials
    4141274 - February 27, 1979 - Weather modification automatic cartridge dispenser
    4167008 - September 4, 1979 - Fluid bed chaff dispenser
    4347284 - August 31, 1982 - White cover sheet material capable aircraft of reflecting ultraviolet rays
    4362271 - December 7, 1982 - Procedure for the artificial modification of atmospheric Precipitation as well as compounds with a dimethyl sulfoxide base for use in carrying out said procedure
    4402480 - September 6, 1983 - Atmosphere modification satellite
    4412654 - November 1, 1983 - Laminar microjet atomizer and method of aerial spraying of liquids
    4415265 - November 15, 1983 - Method and apparatus for aerosol particle absorption spectroscopy
    4470544 - September 11, 1984 - Method of and Means for weather modification
    4475927 - October 9, 1984 - Bipolar Fog abatements System
    4600147 - July 15, 1986 - Liquid propane generator for cloud seeding apparatus
    4633714 - January 6, 1987 - Aerosol particle charge and size analyzer
    4643355 - February 17, 1987 - Method and apparatus for modification of climatic conditions
    4653690 - March 31, 1987 - Method of producing cumulus clouds
    4684063 - August 4, 1987 - Particulates generation and removal
    4686605 - August 11, 1987 - Method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth's atmosphere, ionosphere, and / or magnetosphere
    4704942 - November 10, 1987 - Charged Aerosol
    4712155 - December 8, 1987 - Method and apparatus for creating an artificial electron cyclotron heating region of plasma
    4744919 - May 17, 1988 - Method of dispersing particulate aerosol tracer
    4766725 - August 30, 1988 - Method of suppressing formation of contrails and solution Therefor
    4829838 - May 16, 1989 - Method and apparatus for the measurement of the size of particles entrained in a gas
    4836086 - June 6, 1989 - Apparatus and method for the mixing and diffusion of warm and cold air for dissolving fog
    4873928 - October 17, 1989 - Nuclear-sized explosions without radiation
    4948257 - August 14, 1990 - Laser optical measuring device and method for stabilizing fringe pattern spacing
    4948050 - August 14, 1990 - Liquid atomizing apparatus for aerial spraying
    4999637 - March 12, 1991 - Creation of artificial ionization clouds above the earth
    5003186 - March 26, 1991 - Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming
    5005355 - April 9, 1991 - Method of suppressing formation of contrails and solution Therefor
    5038664 - August 13, 1991 - Method for producing a shell of relativistic particles at an altitude above the earths surface
    5041760 - August 20, 1991 - Method and apparatus for generating and utilizing a compound plasma configuration
    5041834 - August 20, 1991 - Artificial ionospheric mirror Composed of a plasma layer wooden can be tilted
    5056357 - October 15, 1991 - Acoustic method for measuring properties of a mobile medium
    5059909 - October 22, 1991 - Determination of particle size and electrical charge
    5104069 - April 14, 1992 - Apparatus and method for ejecting matter from an aircraft
    5110502 - May 5, 1992 - Method of suppressing formation of contrails and solution Therefor
    5156802 - October 20, 1992 - Inspection of fuel particles with acoustics
    5174498 - December 29, 1992 - Cloud Seeding
    5148173 - September 15, 1992 - Millimeter wave screening cloud and Method
    5245290 - September 14, 1993 - Device for Determining the size and charge of colloidal particles by measuring electroacoustic effect
    5286979 - February 15, 1994 - Process for absorbing ultraviolet radiation overusing dispersed melanin
    5296910 - March 22, 1994 - Method and apparatus for particle analysis
    5327222 - July 5, 1994 - Displacement information detecting apparatus
    5357865 - October 25, 1994 - Method of cloud seeding
    5360162 - November 1, 1994 - Method and composition for Precipitation of atmospheric water
    5383024 - January 17, 1995 - Optical wet steam monitor
    5425413 - June 20, 1995 - Method two hinder the formation and two break-up overhead atmospheric inversions, enhance ground level air circulation and improve urban air quality
    5434667 - July 18, 1995 - Characterization of particles by modulated dynamic light scattering
    5441200 - August 15, 1995 - Tropical cyclone disruption
    5486900 - January 23, 1996 - Measuring device for the amount of charge of toner and image forming apparatus having the measuring device
    5556029 - September 17, 1996 - Method of hydro meteor dissipation (clouds)
    5628455 - May 13, 1997 - Method and apparatus for modification of supercooled fog
    5631414 - May 20, 1997 - Method and device for remote diagnostics of ocean-atmosphere system state
    5639441 - June 17, 1997 - Methods for fine particle formation
    5762298 - June 9, 1998 - Use of artificial satellites in earth orbits adaptively two modify the effect that solar radiation would otherwise have on earth's weather
    5912396 - June 15, 1999 - System and method for remediation of selected atmospheric conditions
    5922976 - July 13, 1999 - Method of measuring aerosol particles overusing automated mobility-classified aerosol detector
    5949001 - September 7, 1999 - Method for aerodynamic particle size analysis
    5984239 - November 16, 1999 - Weather modification by artificial satellite
    6025402 - February 15, 2000 - Chemical composition for effectuating a reduction of visibility obscurations, and a detoxifixation of chemical fumes and fogs in spaces of fire origin
    6030506 - February 29, 2000 - Preparation of independently generated the highly reactive chemical species
    6034073 - March 7, 2000 - Solvent detergent emulsions having antiviral activity
    6045089 - April 4, 2000 - Solar-powered airplane
    6056203 - May 2, 2000 - Method and apparatus for Modifying supercooled clouds
    6110590 - August 29, 2000 - Synthetically spun silk nanofibers and a process for making the same
    6263744 - July 24, 2001 - Automated mobility-classified aerosol detector
    6281972 - August 28, 2001 - Method and apparatus for measuring particle-size distribution
    6315213 - November 13, 2001 - Method of Modifying weather
    6382526 - May 7, 2002 - Process and apparatus for the production of nanofibers
    6408704 - June 25, 2002 - Aerodynamic particle size analysis method and apparatus
    6412416 - July 2, 2002 - Propellant-based aerosol generation devices and method
    6520425 - February 18, 2003 - Process and apparatus for the production of nanofibers
    6539812 - April 1, 2003 - System for measuring the flow rate of a gas by means of ultrasound
    6553849 - April 29, 2003 - Electro Dynamic particle size analyzer
    6569393 - May 27, 2003 - Method and device for cleaning the atmosphere

    It is very much to put into, and I shall confine myself to
    someones patetent 5003186 as Hughes Aircraft.

    This patent involves using metal oxides in contrails "to reduce global warming"

    The key note isolates from patente PDF:

    "A method is disclosed for the Reducing atmospheric warming due to the greenhouse effect resulting from a greenhouse gases layer. The method comp rises the step of seeding the greenhouse gas layer with a quantity of tiny particles of materials characterized by wavelength dependent Emissivity or reflectivity ... Such materials can include the class of materials known as Welsbach materials. The oxides of metal, eg, aluminum oxide, are suitable for the purpose.
    The greenhouse gases layer typically extends between about seven and thirteen kilometers above the earth's surface. The seeding of the stratosphere occure within this layer "
    - Direct quote from Page 6 of the source PDF.

    "Aluminum Oxide is one metal oxide suitable for the purpose wooden relatively inexpensive.
    It is Presently BELIEVED that the particle sizes in the ten to one hundred micron range would be suitable for the seeding purposes. Larger particles would tend two settle to the earth more quickly. The greenhouse gases are typically in the earths stratosphere at an altitude of seven two thirteen kilometers (23,000 ft two 42,000 ft). This suggests that the particle seeding should be done at an altitude on the order of 10 kilometers (33,000 ft). The particles may be seeded by dispersal from seeding aircraft, one exemplary technique may be via the jet fuel as suggested by prior work Regarding the metallic particles. Once the tiny particles have been dispersed into the atmosphere, the particles may Remain in suspension for up to one year. "
    - Direct quote from Page 7 2:08 of the source PDF

    Manufacturer of chemicals:

    King Industries committed two sponsoring four chemicals as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program. These chemicals include diisononylnaphthalene (CAS No. 63512-64-1); dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid (CAS No. 25322-17-2); dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, calcium salt (CAS. 57855-77-3); dinonylnaphthalene and sulfonic acid , barium salt (CAS. 25619-56-1). As part of King Industries' commitment, Exponent has assembled available data and prepared a test plan to Develop additional screening level data on human health effects, environmental fate and effects, and physicochemical properties of the dinonylnaphthalene category.

    Now it is clear that in the USA it is through legislation and reports in recent years 6 years given the possibility that this can be done:

    1.Weather Modification Research and Technology Transfer Authorization Act of 2005 reported in the U.S. Senate - This document at the U.S. Library of Congress Providers for weather modification activities, includingsuch cloud seeding. NOTE: This document seems to be missing from the Library of Congress Web site. It used to be there.

    2.Space Preservation Acts (U.S.) - mentioning "chemtrails" in the context of warfare.

    3.Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2007 introduced, in the U.S. Senate. Includes "promoting the rapid and widespread deployment of advanced technologies and practices for Reducing greenhouse gas emissions" under the EPA.

    4.Federal Aviation Administration Facility Consolidation Moratorium Act of 2007 introduced, in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    5.Aviation Investment and Modernization Act of 2007 introduced, in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    6.Federal Aviation Research and Development Reauthorization Act of 2007 introduced, in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 (PDF) - This is a frightening paper that exists on a U.S. Air Force Web site that details "future scenarios" about weather being used as a tool of warfare.

    7.GLOBAL WARMING AND ICE AGES: Prospects for Physics-Based Modulation of Global Change - This is a paper presented by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Stanford outlining two ways lovegra insolation two counter effects of greenhouse gases and climate change.

    8.Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2005 - A DOE / EIA report about green house gases from November 2006

    That this discussion should have focused on this point, and should / will be about from now (from the skeptic side) is not of this being done, but why they are doing it,
    the possible advantages and disadvantages of ethical issues ect this result,
    and if there is a law that allows for this in Norway.

    So we are totally against this tampering with nature be allowed to be just that.

    There are many different opinions about this, and as an example we can take into
    Wonder Fest science festival Berkeley on 10 Novenber 2010, where leading climatologists met.

    Geo-engeineering experts Julio Friedman and Jane Long discuss the reasons
    Why re-Engineers Earth's atmosphere is so critical.

    (Yes, you crazy to some people, but this is, after all, some of the material
    been presented to our government, and led to the situation we are in today. )

    They point out that drastic action is required, otherwise we will lose a significant portion
    land mass very quickly due to melting ice at the poles and this, as we know will lead to higher sea levels globally.
    They also explain that the general population is ignorant about
    research related climate change
    and that it is irresponsible and leave our fate lie in the hands.
    Furthermore, "in order on two test it, we have to do it", to
    measurement results.

    Solar Radiation Management.
    As volcanoes blocking radiation in the year after the eruption
    So by adding sulfur dioxide directly to the stratosphere using jet aircraft,
    it can provide shade for the Earth by reflecting solar radiation back into space.
    Since the matter in the stratosphere is so high above the earth,
    so by injecting aerosols at these altitudes you create
    vast areas of shade in relation to tropospheric clouds.

    There have been proposed other methods for reducing the solar radiation,
    including space-based reflectors,
    but none of these have been seen as a continuous solution,
    and they are significantly more expensive than
    enlarged contrails to create kundstige clouds.

    These eksprimentene is a reality today with drastic results;
    large parts of the globe is covered by artificial clouds
    daily and the phenomenon known as "global dimming"

    David Dale first report in 2007, was sent to all U.S.'s Senators,
    He did not know then that it was not safe
    that artificial clouds were sprayed. His own words:

    At the time of my first report in 2007, Which was sent to all U.S. Senators (including then-Senator Obama)
    we did not know for certainties Whether artificial clouds spawned by jet contrails were deliberately created.
    We now know that they are.

    While contrails are a "natural" part of jet travel,
    contrail science does not explain the ability of aircraft to start and stop contrails that will,
    nor does contrail theory include the ability of two jets create
    dense cloud cover over thousands of square miles.

    Through the formation of clouds made by jet contrails,
    humans can now exert a great deal of control over the weather.


    I recommend everyone to go and read this report, especially you Fanfario,
    When I consider your understanding of meteorology Limited in line with
    Jostein Mamen (Meteorologist Meteorological Institute) and his colleagues.

    You can "to some extent" inexcusable in your delusion,
    have not read very many of innleggne your
    but remember a while ago that there were over 200
    There was a person here; Anna who mentioned cognitive dissonance,

    (Do not know how important it is to make a psychological analysis of some
    without a further study, then I consider it a bit egosentrert,
    In her case an ambivalent ego with schizophrenic and narsesistiske undertones were words that sprang forth from the cortex) (debate DB - NS)

    Cognitive dissonance, it is well possible that this concept fits very much better on you than Smurfs,
    If I see a comment on the denial.

    When I have to move so I can just ask you one of the same questions I did Mamen.
    How can you get cirrussky to stand still and similar in over 48 min, when it was clouds of windy?
    Hoping for a response from at least from you.

    (Clouds move with the wind.
    High cirrus clouds are pushed along by the jet stream, sometimes they move at more than 100 miles per hour.
    Once the clouds are part of a thunderstorm, so they move usually 30 to 40 mph.)

    (Hint: assumptions for wave clouds and how this occurs, use your imagination and contemplate over chemitrails HAARP, so maybe it's starting to dimre)

    David Dales page:

    Here, there will be presented which uses metals and chemicals are intended and a number of other useful info.

    (Much of the material I present here is taken from there)


    We've all seen contrails formed by planes. The strips can develop into so-called cirrus clouds. A recently published work based on satellite observations have shown that there has been a marked increase in the incidence of cirrus in areas with high air traffic.

    By Frode Stordal, Gunnar Myhre and Eivind J. G. Stordal

    You lie on a rock or strolling in nature, and you look up to the blue sky. A plane passes, and you see a white vapor trails behind the plane. Sometimes disappears strip after a few seconds or minutes. But often, the temperature and moisture conditions where the aircraft is such that the strip remains longer. Then it will widen out and gradually developed into a fjærsky (cirrus), which consists of ice crystals, as we can see in the picture. This phenomenon has long been known, but only recently have researchers attempted to quantify it (Boucher, 1999).

    In the EU project tradeoff (coordinated by Ivar Isaksen, UiO) has studied trends in cirrus observed by satellites during a period of 16 years (Stordal et al, 2005). These data have, together with traffic data for aircraft. Using a statistical analysis, we found that there has been an increase in cirrus in areas with high air traffic. In European areas with heavy traffic, we found that up to half of cirrus covered today due to air traffic. The effect is weaker in Norway with an air traffic which is far less dense than over parts of the continent. Yet it happens not infrequently that cirrus blocking the sun's rays on a cloudless day.

    In our area, we consider often sunny as good as we are reluctant to do without and air travel are helping to reduce this good. Our focus in this work is still largely related to climate change. When cirrus reduces radiation in sunlight causes a cooling. However cirrus also has a heated greenhouse effect as with the greenhouse gases, because the capture of a part of the earth radiation (infrared radiation) that might otherwise escape into space. Of the two effects are the greenhouse effect most efficient cirrus, so that we get a total heating. Cirrus clouds are derived from air and thus probably a man-made contributions to global warming.

    Air traffic affects climate in other ways. Aircraft emissions affect concentrations of greenhouse gases (CO2, ozone, water vapor and methane) and aerosols (soot and sulfate). In addition, a warming due to contrails themselves, before they manage to form cirrus and of cirrus clouds formed by stripes. Overall, warming stronger than cooling, so that air travel contributes to global warming (IPCC, 1999; sauce et al 2005).

    In our work we found that cirrus constitute the largest single contribution, about 1/3 of the total warming caused by air traffic. It should be noted that trends in satellite observations of cirrus is somewhat uncertain, so that the calculation of climate impact of cirrus is also uncertain. The search for a more accurate result will continue, partly by satellite and partly by means of models.
    Boucher, O. (1999). Air traffic may increase item cirrus cloudiness, Nature, 397, 30-31.
    Macht, L. and T. Carpenter (1971). Trends in high cloudiness in Denver and Salt Lake City, in Man's Impact on Climate, eds WH Matthews, WW Kellogg, and GD Robinson, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England.
    Chagnon, S.A. (1981). Midwestern cloud, sunshine and temperature trends since 1901 - Possible evidence of jet contrail effects, J. Appl. Meteorol., 20, 496-508.
    IPCC (1999). Aviation and the Global Atmosphere, A Special Report of IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), Penner, JE, Lister, DH, Griggs, DJ, Dokken, D., J., and McFarland, M. (Eds), 373 pp ., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
    Stordal, F., Myhre, G., Arland, W., Svendby, T., Stordal ejg, Rossow, WB and Lee, DS (2005). Is there a trend in cirrus cloud cover due two aircraft traffic? Atmos. Chem. Phys., Vol 5, pp 2155-2162, SRef-ID: 1680-7324/acp/2005-5-2155.
    The sauce, R., I.S.A. Isaksen, V. Grew, D. Hauglustainei, D.S. Lee, G. Myhre, M.O. Köhler, G. Pitari, U. Schumann, F. Stordal and C. Zerefos (2005). Aviation radiative forcing in 2000: An Update on IPCC (1999). Meteorol. Zeitschrift, 14, 555-561.

    Cirrus Clouds and dynamics
    Time: 08/14/2009 11:15 - 14/08/2009 12:00

    Location: Geophysical institute, the auditorium in the East Wing
    Peter Spichtinger from the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, lecturer on feedback mechanisms between cirrus clouds and dynamics.


    Cirrus clouds are clouds IMPORTANT as other modulators of the Earth
    Atmosphere System. However, it is still unclear if cirrus clouds
    Contribute to a net warming or cooling of the system although a net
    warming for (thin) cirrus clouds is often Assumed. For more reliable
    Estimates on the radiative impact of cirrus cloud we have to improve
    our knowledge about their life cycle, internal structure and
    micro physical properties.

    Ice formation in the upper Troposphere is very sensitive to local
    dynamics, Thus, the impact of cirrus clouds on Wed dynamics must be
    investigated more detailed. On the other hand, there are some
    Indications that cirrus clouds are not only Triggered by (large-scale)
    dynamics but they could also feed back to dynamics, changing the
    environmental conditions.

    In this talk I want to present some basic concepts of feedbacks of
    cirrus clouds and dynamics and some new results about the interaction
    of cirrus clouds with their environment. Finally, some suggestions for
    future research and connections two dynamics are presented.

    This is, as I said, only a limited excerpts of different research on the subject,
    and encourages further study

    I have not yet found any legislation rettferdiggør this g
    lobal experiment which is also a reality here in Norway,
    believes that there is strong evidence of this being done, that this is a crime, see Act of 13
    March 1981 6 on pollution and waste (fl) § 78 ground joints a and b, § 79, subsection A.

    When the operator negligence / willful released, store or transport the waste so that it can be unsightly
    or cause damage or inconvenience to the environment, cf fl § 7 (possibly
    left / cleared, cf fl § 28).
    It also appears to Penal Code § 48a of corporate liability.

    Most environmental laws is punishable by fines or imprisonment for one year and two or three years for a serious offense. In 1993, the general clause against environmental crime (Penal Code § 152 b) adopted. After Penal Code § 152 b is the penalty for serious environmental offenses set to six years in prison.

    In several decisions in recent years the Supreme Court has emphasized that the penalties for environmental crimes are sharpened, see Rt. 2001 p 110 (environmental work), Rt 2002 p 1713 (Bryggen judgment), Rt 2003 p 634 (CITES judgment), Rt 2004 p 1645 (recycling judgment) and Rt 2005 p 162 (jervedom II) .

    That said, there are pictures and info about what is physically possible under investigation (see earlier arrived) and
    feel it may be unwise and post this at the present time.
    Need a court ruling that has led them to expect.
    Analyses from the Geophysical Institute is required.
    Meteorological is complicated but exciting.

    It is also necessary to have a box for setting competent
    into the timing, basic meteorological,
    visualize events going properly, comparisons of technical data ect, otherwise it can be misinterpreted.

    If this however does not bear any fruit, I want them to take part in writing an article / conclusion,
    of the observations made.
    I put a microscopic chance that this is a natural phenomenon,
    after reading up on me until I partly meteorological sure, in spite of much adversity.
    Adds in a small Utdr from David Dales report
    which I think is relevant:
  13. Danny55

    Danny55 Member

    Well Palli, if you can tell us WHY each of those patents is relevant, it would be a help.

    For example. patent 3899144 1975 Powder Contrail Generator.

    This patent was issued for a device to be affixed to a target used in Aerial Gunnery Target Practice. The target is towed behind an aircraft and the Powder Contrail Generator leaves a trail of white particles behind it so the Gun Crew can see their target.
    It uses 1.5 kilos of powder.

    What does this have to do with "chemtrails"?

    Also, please note that the issuing of a patent does not mean that the invention patented is actually in use otherwise we would be born by centrifugal force

    see http://colitz.com/site/3216423/3216423.htm
  14. Palli

    Palli New Member

    If you scroll further down there is a explanation of the div patents, you can not stop on the list.
  15. Danny55

    Danny55 Member

    You can't just post up a list of patents and say "These prove chemtrails!" You should explain WHT you think these prove chemtrails

    For example, from the list you posted
    "6030506 - February 29, 2000 - Preparation of independently generated the highly reactive chemical species "

    What does this patent have to do with alledged spraying????
  16. Boston

    Boston Active Member

    lost me right about the time I read this part, which made absolutely no sense whatsoever

  17. David Fraser

    David Fraser Senior Member

    I was just wondering. At what stage did 10 microns (10 um) become a "nanoparticle"? Is a nanoparticle not 1 to 100nm? Also I find patents tedious to read, which ones mention nanoparticles? Help a lazy guy out ;-)
  18. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    I don't know if the patents in question are in a list I saw a while back, but I did look at a Loooooooooooooooong list on ATS a couple of years ago and made comments on every one, so here's those comments repeated:

    And so on to dplum’s list - in many cases I have been able to cut and paste the abstract or a section of the body of the patent that (I hope) clearly explains what it is for.
    7501103 - Tropospheric volume elements enriched with vital elements and/or protective substances
    So you can burn stuff and it will enter the atmosphere, and this guy will then charge you for using his patent if you are doing so with the intent to introduce anything into the tropopuase for any beneficial or protective effect!
    Chemtrailers beware – I hope you are paying your licence fees!
    =cloud seeding using something other than silver iodide
    = Cloud seeding
    A satellite weather modification system – certainly linked to geo-engineering, but there’s nothing about it that resembles “chemtrails” or contrails – unless you think the satellites in earth orbit are making holograms of aircraft “spraying” stuff??
    Cloud seeding - a formula for making “candles” along the lines of those already used for cloud seeding. It does use barium – I guess that might be a problem for some.
    more cloud seeding
    • Like Like x 1
  19. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Blocking UV radiation by microscopic beads of melanin, especially in areas of reduced Ozone – well it is certainly interesting – so where is all this melanin on the ground and in atmospheric samples?? :puz:

    A fluid ejector!! Of course aircraft do have many of these already – for dumping/draining unwanted fluids from various systems (no – not toilets!! :eek: ) typically leaking oil from engines or hydraulic components - they are usually termed “drain mast” or similar, and you can find them all over aircraft, including on engine nacelles.
    I downloaded the pictures for this one, and it’s exactly what I thought – an alternative design for drain masts - and I think I may have worked on aircraft that had this design or something similar fitted.

    The old favourite – “Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming “ – yet to see any actually fitted to any a/c of course.....plenty available online for this one – !

    “Creation of artificial ionization clouds above the earth “ – ie something like HAARP - same as the one above – why hide it?? :puz:
    But not actually connected with chemtrails in any way – the typical height mentioned is 90 kilometers – just a little above where aircraft actually fly!! :mad:@:

    Ie something to allow seeds to be sown from aircraft ......

    4948050 Liquid atomizing apparatus for aerial spraying
    AHA! This looks suspicious!!
    Until you realise that he’s patenting a system where the atomisers in a spray system are rotated to produce the desired characteristics in a more uniform manner than the current systems used on all sorts of spraying – eg ag, oil dispersal, etc.
    These atomisers are the sort that stand out like dogs gonads – so please let us all know if you see them on airliners - because that WOULD be interesting. Until then you can see them on crop dusters, insecticide sprayers, etc.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  20. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    I think we’ve seen this one before:
    Yep – more seed spraying.....

    Selective thermal radiators
    I had a hard time figuring out why this one is in the list until I saw the word “Welsbach” – see 5003186 above – I think there mere presence of this word in hte patent has soem chemmies all upset about it, even though it has nothign to do with chemtrails – or even contrails – or geoengineering, or even spraying anything at all!
    So what is it? It is a means for converting between parts of the light spectrum – specifically between IR and visible light – eg turning visible light into IR light, or vice versa.
    It is to enable the measurement of IR light by simpler means than needing IR detection equipment.
    Tell me how that is relevant please??
    Relevance to chemtrails, contrails, or anything else??

    Well at leasts it is something to do with aerosols and toxics – that’s a bit of an advance over the usual....;)
    It requires tanks of the material to be sprayed, and tanks of compressed gas to propell them, and an apparatus to charge them up. As always sith such inventions – some evidence of it being used on airliners, or even on military aircraft, in flight, to disperse something inimical would go a long way to proving chemtrails exist.
    This patent, on the other hand, does not.

    4653690 A method for making cumulus clouds
    So it’s a pyrotechnic – that means it burns – sort of like cloud seeding candles we all know about .....and it supposedly makes cumulus clouds....which exist at a fairly low altitude compared to contrails.....so what is it’s relevance to chemtrails or contrails??
  21. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    A spray aparatus – at least it has some relevance to possible chemtrails. But see my note at the top – it’s not news, and it’s still not actually evidence that chemtrails exist.
    More geoengineering from satellites – so nothing to do with chemtrails or contrails at all.
    = cloud seeding again – an alternative to using Silver Iodide.
    There’s the ionosphere again – in this case the idea is to introduce a “cold plasma” – hydrogen – into the ionosphere!! Sound scarey – however it is also nothing to do with aircraft – the ionosphere starts at about 80-90 km height, and the method used is satellite injection into the earth’s magnetic field in the vicinity of the van Allen Belt by satellite!! The plasma then “rides” down the field lines and creates aurora that can be studied..
    So not really much to do with contrails, chemtrails, or aircraft......
    = cloud seeding – an alternative to silver Iodide
    3899144 POWDER CONTRAIL GENERATION – this is always a goodie for chemmies, and again I’m surprised it is hidden in among all the dross.
    I suspect the OP didn’t actually know it was in here.....
    As with all mechanisms – see my starting comments – technical ability has not been a problem.
    In this case the objective is to create a visible trail for target aircraft tracking that does not require a heat source to burn oil or similar.
    • Like Like x 1
  22. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Relevance to “proving” that chemtrails exist seems week in this one....

    =cloud seeding. A slightly different aspect of it – suggesting that some cloud seeding materials are ineffective because they are brittle, etc., so this proposes a method of encapsulating them to protect them.
    But still just cloud seeding.

    = cloud seeding
    3545677 title = “Method of cloud seeding” – enough said:mad:@:
    From here on the patents are only in the form of pdf scans of the original documents rather than cut-able text, so I haven't been able to provide that – any spelling mistakes in my descriptions are my own fault.
    Artificial ion cloud – a method for creating these in the ozone layer by releasing materials in the stratosphere – specifically lithium hydride, sodium hydride, butyl lithium or ethyl cesium, to create a radioreflective layer, that presumably could be used for radar or radio purposes.
    Well.....it’s certainly something proposed for the stratosphere, where aircraft fly, so that’s something relevant. Other than that......what is it supposed to prove??

    3517512 Apparatus for suppressing contrails – this has to be important – surely??
    It is a proposal to inject chlorosulphuric acid into engine exhaust, to nucelate water – but to create such small particles that they would not actually be visible.
    Hm......well....since chemtrails are visible it would not seem to be all that relevant after all! That plus no reports that I’m aware of that it has ever been fitted to any a/c (feel free to update) and it appears to be “just another” means of “spraying” – for which see my opening comments.

    3429507 Title: “Rainmaker”....hmm...I can see where this is heading....
    But actually it is a proposal for a huge venturi to be fitted to, or made as, the fuselage of an aircraft to make rain. If this existed it would be about as obvious as the nose on an elephant’s face!

    3374708 title: electrical anti-personnel weapon
    Huh- relevant how?? :puz: It’s basically a taser, but using 2 streams of conductive liquid to send the charge rather than wires.

    3222675 Title: "Means for positioning a plurality of elements in orbit around a celestial body”
    So how to get more than 1 thing in orbit and control it there – the patent specifically refers to microwave reflectors, but, as with so many of these, there seems no obvious connection to aircraft or chemtrails.
    I guess there might be some relevance to geo-engineering from orbiting reflectors tho – do you think that is why it made your list??
    • Like Like x 1
  23. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    3174150 title: "Self focusing antenna system”
    I do not see any connection here to chemtrails, nor geoengineering. It uses satellite communications to illustrate it’s point – is that why it is in the list?? [​IMG]

    3133250 title: "Method an apparatus for communicating through a region of ionised gas."
    It seeks to show that you can use a rocket exhaust trail to help reception of radio signals too and from a rocket – usually the exhaust trail gets in the way apparently.

    Relevance? Ionised gas gets a lot of mention in other patents in this list, and i guess it is mentioning a use for rocket exhaust?? [​IMG].

    2550324 title: Process for controlling the weather”

    Until you read it. It is a process for removing water particles that are too small to actually see from the air – basically it is still “cloud seeding” – albeit without clouds – it is about using a range of materials to nucleate water vapour in an attempt to keep airports clear of bad weather.

    Various materials are suggested – including snow (natural & artificial), “flake ice” (again both natural and manufactured), cement, salts (Potassium iodide, sodium chloride, calcium chloride).

    So basically is postulating the same processes as cloud seeding – albeit in 1948 (the date of the patent) IMO they didn’t really understand what they could actually achieve.

    2527230 title: “Method of crystal formation and precipitation”.
    Again from 1948, again cloud seeding – specifically trying to make snow

    2232728 Title: Method and composition for dispelling vapours.
    From 1937 (didn’t chemtrails start in the 1990’s?? [​IMG] ) – dispersing hygroscopic particles into the air to clear fog and mist.
    Relevance to chemtrails??

    1957075 title: “Aeroplane spray equipment”
    In 1931 O. Morgenson Jnr had the bright idea to use the venturi effect to disperse materials from aircraft, and apparently 80 years later this is evidence that chemtrails exist. I wonder if he knew that would happen?! [​IMG]
    THE END.

    Even just cutting and pasting all that cost me an IQ point from contemplating how people can "connect dots"!!
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013
    • Like Like x 2
  24. FreiZeitGeist

    FreiZeitGeist Senior Member

    One thing about Patents wasn´t mentioned before here...

    What is the reason that patents exist?

    They exist to save the rigths of a inventor. If someone wants to do something that is based on a patent, he must get in contact to the inventor and the inventor has the rigth to say: "Yes, you are allowed to use this methode" or "No, You´re not allowed to use it"...

    ... and this US-Patent by a guy from Bratislava (Slovakia) is the coffin-nail to all Chemtrails by using fuel

    It descripes the general "Adding-Chemicals-to-fuel to control the climate"-Idea with much words and without any details.

    US-Patent 20090032214

    Source: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph...srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=20090032214.PGNR.

    Mr. Mark Hucko as an inventor now has - thanks to this patent - the rights to the idea to "Spray" something with commercial Airliners by adding something to the fuel.

    Mr. Obama (or "The powers that be" in the US) - if you are doing "chemtrails" to save the climate - you have to ask Mr. Hucko in Bratislava first, before doing so.

    Mr. Hucko in Bratislava must be rigth now a rich men :)

    If not, he could take a lawyer and he could sue his patent rights-to the US-Government

    The patent itself is bogus. Just take this part of it from the "Practical Application"-Part:

    In Praxis - this is bogus. Great Airports in Europe getting the fuel through a Pipeline-Network. It is not possible to give some flights going to the east the "cooling-fuel" and giving the others to the west the "warming fuel".
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    Folks patents don't have to be feasible or reasonable

    Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_1569...nventions-ever-patented_p2.html#ixzz2c6cbJjw1

    while you are at cracked, you need to check out this also

    • Like Like x 2
  26. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    It occurs to me if one thought a patent would provide "proof" of chemtrailing, it would be relatively cheap and easy to make one up oneself, register it, and then have other chemmies use it as proof.

    "Here's a patent to spray infected blood into the atmosphere via passenger plane for the purpose of population reduction!"

    "Look! Here's a patent to introduce librium into the air in order to make the population docile!"
    • Like Like x 2
  27. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    I entered "chemtrails" into Google Scholar. Look at this hit Google Scholar has found:
    I mean, it's nice that Google Scholar links to this forum but it's supposed to find scientific references...
  28. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I suspect this is due to the lack of actual papers that reference chemtrails.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  29. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    : (

    Before It's News made it on page 4.
    • Funny Funny x 2
  30. Hevach

    Hevach Senior Member

    Google Scholar resorts to progressively less scholarly sources the less actual results it gets. If it gets none at all, it's only marginally more useful than a stock google search.

    In this cast, it's a matter of fitting your terms to the search. Searching Google Scholar for "chemtrail" is kind of like searching for "death rock from space" if you're interested in meteorite impacts - while it might be a literally accurate term, and some people have even used it, it's not one you're likely to see in a scholarly piece on the subject.

    Try things like "aerosol atmospheric engineering" or "solar radiation management" if you want to find scientific reference.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  31. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    I don't know why you think that chemtrails have something to do with atmospheric engineering or SRM. "Chemtrail" is a conspiracy theory concept, so for this search term I would expect to find scholarly articles about e.g. the social psychology of chemtrail belief, etc.
    It's disappointing that if Google Scholar can't find scientific papers on something then it yields rubbish instead.
  32. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

  33. Hevach

    Hevach Senior Member

    Because that IS what the chemtrail conspiracy theory concept is about, and with GS, searching a single term without context searches for articles with that as the primary subject - it would sort what you're looking for low if it finds it at all.

    Anyway, if this is the aspect you're looking for, then you're going to want to search for something more general (but also more specific at the same time). Workable terms would be along the lines of "psychology of conspiracy theorism." It's quite difficult to study conspiracy theorist groups in a vacuum for a lot of reasons, including the difficulty gaining cooperation (particularly among a theory that abuses the informed consent concept like chemtrailers) and difficulty assembling a meaningful sample size. Individual case studies are often redacted of identifiable specifics, and the journals they are published in aren't as "with the times" as more research oriented ones and aren't as searchable online (at least without a subscription). And then there's the fact that psychologists don't widely agree that they're separate things to be studied, many believe they're a single unified phenomenon to be studied as a whole (and they're likely true - as Mick's pointed out conspiracy theories are a hierarchy from least to most outlandish, and most who believe one believe all the others up to that point).
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  34. Efftup

    Efftup Senior Member

    Well it is NOW.
    The conspiracy has always been they are spraying SOMETHING, usually Aluminium and Barium, but the reasons WHY keep changing over time in whatever they think will make the most convincing argument.
    While it is scientifically sound to address your hypothesis if the evidence doesn't support it, there is still no real evidence it is happening, so the alleged reasons why are still kind of irrelevant.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  35. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    I'm a little mystified by this.

    They do--inexplicably--use the term "contrails/chemtrails" in the heading...
    but if you actually look at the 8 search results, zero of them uses the term "chemtrail" in any way. o_O

    It's kind of like if a book had a Chapter on "Wolves/Werewolves" but when you actually read the chapter
    you saw that it only dealt with wolves...no mention whatsoever of mystical werewolves.

    So, do you think that it means anything...or are you just noting the peculiarity of the inclusion of the term?

    Screen Shot 2015-01-02 at 12.30.47 PM.
    • Like Like x 1
  36. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Senior Member

    Someone's added a tag to them perhaps? Maybe they were hoping to get people searching for chemtrails to actually read some science on contrails.
    • Like Like x 1
  37. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    I think they are trying to attract more visitors to their web site by including this keyword. I don't think it's a good idea though.
  38. Efftup

    Efftup Senior Member

    is it definitely a keyword in the site? and not just if you type contrails/chemtrails it comes up with anything with contrails in, just like google does with partial matches if you don't get clever with the advanced search settings?
  39. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    Yes, it is.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  40. Ross Marsden

    Ross Marsden Senior Member

    It is interesting to compare the scholar search results of these phrases
    contrails +chemtrails
    contrails -chemtrails
    chemtrails -contraiils