Aviation fuel additives

[scombrid]

http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/P1005KRK.PDF

Characterization of Emissions from Commercial Aircraft Engines during the Aircraft Particle Emissions eXperiment (APEX) 1 to 3

 

[rezn8d]

Skip to 48:24 in the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWSZxtGlseI

He calls the cirrostratus clouds and contrails "chemtrails".

At 49:06 he refers to the contrails as "typical metal laden trails of aerosols being spread out vertically into the storm, on the west side of the storm so its pulled right into the eye...".

Then at 50 minutes he says "It looks like they laden it with chemicals. They understand that this stuff affects it."...

That certainly looks to me like he thinks stuff is being sprayed deliberately.

I too would like him to clarify whether he is merely interested in pollution as a byproduct of aviation or if he thinks the pollution is a by-product of stuff added to aviation fuel for non-aviation purposes. I do not have that impression from his videos.

Oh, and by the way, the cirrus clouds at the tropopause around the periphery of tropical cyclones are known as "outflow" cirrus. They are part of air flowing away from the convection at the core of the storm. Air flows toward the cyclone at the surface and away from it aloft such that you have cyclonic flow at the surface and anti-cyclonic flow aloft. Anything coming from an airplane in that layer, contrails or otherwise, flow away from the storm. Additionally, contails are going to form and persist in that environment irrespective of fuel additives.

Science dudes from 1976 say:

Weather Modification by Carbon Dust Absorption of Solar Energy
http://digitool.library.colostate.e...icmlzL2R0bC9kM18xL2FwYWNoZV9tZWRpYS8yNzI2.pdf
http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/grayetal1976.pdf

The five papers of this report have been written in an attempt to
open up a new dialogue among meteorologists and other scientists on
the possibility of meso-scale weather modification through carbon dust
interception of solar energy. Growing population pressures and predicted
future global food shortages dictate that man explore all his possibilities for beneficial weather modification. Nearly all the weather modification efforts over the last quarter century have been aimed at producing changes on the cloud scale through exploitation of the saturated vapor pressure difference between ice and water. This is not to be
criticized, but it is time we also consider the feasibility of weather
modification on other time-space scales and with other physical hypotheses. The authors wish to share their ideas on this new area of potentialweather modification with other interested individuals and obtain
their comments and criticisms. They are hopeful that more exploratory
research on this subject can soon be started.

Content from External Source

Fig. 3

Content from External Source

portrays comparative areas which can be covered by various amounts
of carbon dust at 10 percent area coverage in contrast with the
typical size of the large hurricane' cloud cluster. This would
cause an artificial increase of the mean boundary layer temperature of l degree
C/hr for 10 hours over the dotted area shown. These
enormous area coverages and heating rates open the possibility
of meso-synoptic-sca1e weather modification.

Content from External Source

Military guys 1995-96 say:


Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, AF 2025
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-5.htm

Figure 5-2. A Systems Development Road Map to Weather Modification in 2025.


Carbon Black Dust (2005)


Military guys 1997 saying:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/133032244...ogy-Symposium-1997-USAF-Dr-Arnold-a-Barnes-Jr





Create/Suppress Cirrus/Contrails


In 2008 Code C2741 (Warhead Development Brance) NAWCWPNS, China Lake, California 93555-6001 say:

cryptome.org/weather-war.pdf

“successful completion of the proposed effort and the follow-on E&MD program(s) will give the U.S. military a viable, state-of-the-art weather modification capability again. ... I know of no countermeasures.”



In 2009 USAF say:

Operational Defenses through Weather Control in 2030

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ada539515

The United States needs to incorporate the defense against directed energy weapons with the same
intensity used developing anti-ballistic missile defenses. One of the major drawbacks to optical or directed
energy systems is the inability to penetrate clouds or dense fog. Advances in technology are beginning to
bring weather phenomena under our control. Greatly increased computing power and micronized delivery
systems will allow us to create specific perturbations in local atmospheric conditions. These perturbations
allow for the immediate and lasting ability to create localized fog or stratus cloud formations shielding
critical assets against attack from energy based weapons. The future of nanotechnology will enable
creation of stratus cloud formations to defeat DEW and optically targeted attacks on United Sates assets.
The solution the weather control problem involves networked miniature balloons feeding and receiving
data from a four-dimensional variation (4d-Var) computer model through a sensor and actor network. A
network of diamond-walled balloons enters the area to be changed and then both measures and affects
localized temperature and vapor content. This system effectively shortens the control loop of an
atmospheric system to the point it can be managed. The capabilities in the diamond-walled balloons are
based on the future of nanotechnology.

Content from External Source

Moshe Alamaro 2010 say:

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/interviews/interview/1306/

Moshe - Until now, we didn’t find any method that which is working. We are right now working on our 4th method which is spreading carbon black or soot on the top of hurricanes from aeroplanes and we have shown that this might change the thermodynamic of the hurricanes, lessen the intensity of the hurricane and/or be able to divert its track from one track to another.

Content from External Source

I say:

I guess my point is "leave nature alone." Everyone here should know that weather modification in the USA is big business from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange to the US. Bureau of Reclamation, and they will use everything from peepee (joke intended, urea, fertilizer to melt fog over airports/AF bases) to airplane exhaust to alter the skies to suit their needs.

The History of Weather Control (interactive javascript timeline)
http://terraforminginc.com/weather-control/index.html


Bill Gates and the Department of Homeland Security want to modify hurricanes:
http://rezn8d.net/2013/04/16/cloud-seeding-from-pluviculture-to-hurricane-hacking/

The rest is here:
http://terraforminginc.com/climate-engineering-exposed/index.html
and here:
http://rezn8d.com/

 

[rezn8d]

Do planes trigger rains? http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/podcasts/show/2011.08.21/

The rain in Spain falls mainly on the "plane". Or so the saying goes, but new research has confirmed that aeroplanes do cause clouds to dump their contents prematurely, often around airports, and in this week's show we explore this weather-altering effect of aviation. We also ask industry leader Rolls-Royce to explain how a jet engine works and how their designers have cut noise pollution from planes by over 99% since 1960. In the news, we hear how scientists are forecasting more accurate space weather predictions thanks to a new way to spot sunspots before they even erupt, a new study finds a host of new uses for old drugs, an artificial chromosome looks set to remedy muscular dystrophy and chemists discover diamonds being made in the flame of a candle..

Content from External Source

 

[Mick West]

I guess my point is "leave nature alone."

That's not a point though, is it? Nobody leaves nature alone.

And of course people want to modify hurricanes, why would they not, if it can be done safely?

 

[rezn8d]

I mean in this thread. I know he's got a wide variety of theories elsewhere (at least implied theories).

Jim, maybe you could clarify?

That your contrailscience.com is misleading, and discounting all the reasons one could say "I'm concerned about aviation pollution."

I want you to include information on indavertent cloud seeding and toxic chemical releases related to aviation pollution on your website and/or when you do an interview say something like "if you want a legitimate reason to hate chemtrails... here's a few"

 

[Mick West]

That your contrailscience.com is misleading, and discounting all the reasons one could say "I'm concerned about aviation pollution."

I want you to include information on indavertent cloud seeding and toxic chemical releases related to aviation pollution on your website and/or when you do an interview say something like "if you want a legitimate reason to hate chemtrails... here's a few"

Why?

 

[Cairenn]

Chris - So what is the mechanism behind this then? What actually causes the aeroplane to make this phenomena occur?

Andy - So around the tips of propeller blades for propeller aircraft and for turbo prop aircraft, there is expansion of the air, that’s the engines pushing back behind it, and the expansion process causes cooling. Cooling then can cause cloud droplets, which are at the ambient temperature anytime they're below about -10 degrees centigrade, to cool to the point where they spontaneously freeze at -40. And this is a well-known phenomenon of spontaneous freezing. It’s just that the aircraft, just like a weather modification activities, act as a nucleus that provide ice crystals and these crystals then seed the cloud.

Content from External Source

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/interviews/interview/1777/

Not because of any chemical but ICE, the first one they noticed was cause by a prop plane.

I love it when I debunk with the article that someone posted without reading it.

 

[TWCobra]

That your contrailscience.com is misleading, and discounting all the reasons one could say "I'm concerned about aviation pollution."

I want you to include information on indavertent cloud seeding and toxic chemical releases related to aviation pollution on your website and/or when you do an interview say something like "if you want a legitimate reason to hate chemtrails... here's a few"

At least you are showing your true colors now Jim. Can we drop the pretense that your main concern is pollution?

 

[rezn8d]

Why?

Because your statements are inaccurate (see below) to begin with, and misleading as if to say "there's nothing to see here" when clearly there is.
From the IPCC, to NASA, to the AMS, they all note many potential harmful results from aviation pollution, yet you simply state "this is all natural" which is far from the truth.

Jet fuel MSDS
http://www.tsocorp.com/stellent/groups/corpcomm/documents/tsocorp_documents/msdsjetfuel.pdf

California Prop. 65 : WARNING! This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to
cause cancer. Naphthalene 91-20-3

Content from External Source

http://www.carsonoil.com/pdfs/MSDSJetFuel.pdf

No data are available on the adverse effects of this material on the environment. Neither COD nor BOD data are available

Content from External Source

Inadvertent climate modification due to anthropogenic lead


http://apps.carleton.edu/curricular/chem/assets/CziczoNatGeo2009.pdf

Anthropogenic activities now dominate, accounting for >99% in
the mid-1980s. At that time, most of the lead introduced to the
atmosphere was from tetraethyl lead (TEL) added to automotive
petrol. With regulation of TEL, total lead has dropped significantly,
with a 20-fold decrease reported in the continental United States
in the two decades since 1980 (ref. 17). TEL in light aviation
fuel is now thought to be the dominant new source, although
the uncertain and increasing emissions from coal combustion
and smelting could be equivalent or greater3,17. In a study of
atmospheric particles from 50nm to 2 m diameter, Murphy et al.3
showed that lead was detectable in 510%. The size dependence
of the lead concentration and the mixing state supported the
coagulation of small (<50 nm) primary lead particles with preexisting
atmospheric aerosol as the source of most of the particles3.
Since the mid-1940s it has been known that artificial ice nuclei
could be produced18. Two materials found to nucleate ice as high as
a few degrees below 273 K were silver and lead iodide19, although
the high toxicity of the latter limited its use. Lead oxides and
mixtures with ammonium iodide were subsequently found to be
similar, if not better, ice nuclei than silver and lead iodide (ref. 20).

Content from External Source

A guy who devotes his life to debunking asks me why he should tell the whole truth... judge that people.

 

[rezn8d]

At least you are showing your true colors now Jim. Can we drop the pretense that your main concern is pollution?

read last response above

 

[Mick West]

Because your statements are inaccurate

Which statements are inaccurate? Quote them.

 

[Mick West]

It seems rather odd that you think that because I have a site on contrails, you think I should be issuing statements about jet engine pollution.

The pollution is exactly the same regardless of if there is contrails or blue sky.

If I ran a blog on why the sky was blue, then should I also be issuing statements about pollution?

 

[rezn8d]

OK, your words here: http://contrailscience.com/contrails-and-chemtrails-the-ifaq/

Contrails, which are ice particles vs chemtrails?
Some people say the longer lasting trails are “chemtrails”, but there’s no evidence to support this, as some trails have always lasted a long time.

Content from External Source

I say chemtrails are invisible... can you see the carbon black coming out the back of the plane? How about the aluminum and barium? I can't.

Is there barium in gasoline?
Not according to Google, except if added via fuel additives, and those mentioned were old, and related to diesel. You might get some barium in the exhaust from barium additives in the engine lubricants, such as Barium Hydroxide Octahydrate.

Content from External Source

Google is a terrible source... use the IPCC
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_sr/?src=/climate/ipcc/aviation/035.htm
3.2.3.2 Metal Particles

Aircraft jet engines also directly emit metal particles. Their sources include engine erosion and the combustion of fuel containing trace metal impurities or metal particles that enter the exhaust with the fuel (Chapter 7). Metal particles-comprising elements such as Al, Ti, Cr, Fe, Ni, and Ba-are estimated to be present at the parts per billion by volume (ppbv) level at nozzle exit planes (CIAP, 1975; Fordyce and Sheibley, 1975). The corresponding concentrations of 107​ to 108​ particles/kg fuel (assuming 1-mm radius; see below) are much smaller than for soot. Although metals have been found as residuals in cirrus and contrail ice particles (Chen et al., 1998; Petzold et al., 1998; Twohy and Gandrud, 1998), their number and associated mass are considered too small to affect the formation or properties of more abundant volatile and soot plume aerosol particles.

Do contrails create pollution?
No. Contrails are just ice clouds made from the water in plane engine exhausts. However some people consider this to be visual pollution. Plane engine exhaust is pollution just like car and truck exhaust is, however a plane creates the same amount of pollution wether it leaves a contrail or not.

Content from External Source

Completely insufficient answer based on my prior postings in this forum.

Is chemtrails responsible for acid rain?
If planes were spraying something like sulphur, then that would create acid rain. But there’s no evidence that they are. The human causes of acid rain are things like power stations, factories and transportation.

Content from External Source

Here's evidence:
http://www.kallmanclassic.com/micro...m/Bulzan CAAFI NASA Presentation 11-30-11.pdf

Do commercial airlines seed clouds on the west coast
Not in the usual sense of making low rain clouds rain more. But contrails are clouds, and the ones that persist are essentially”seeded” by the engine exhaust. But contrails are ice clouds, and don’t produce rain. They do sometimes make the sky overcast.

Content from External Source

They are seeded but don't produce rain? Hogwash: On the Possibility of Weather Modification by Aircraft Contrails, 1970:

"likely that inadvertent cloud seeding by jet aircraft may be of the same order of magnitude as that attained in commercial cloud seeding operations"

See other carbon black seeding references above this post.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/podcasts/show/2011.08.21/

The rain in Spain falls mainly on the "plane". Or so the saying goes, but new research has confirmed that aeroplanes do cause clouds to dump their contents prematurely, often around airports, and in this week's show we explore this weather-altering effect of aviation. We also ask industry leader Rolls-Royce to explain how a jet engine works and how their designers have cut noise pollution from planes by over 99% since 1960. In the news, we hear how scientists are forecasting more accurate space weather predictions thanks to a new way to spot sunspots before they even erupt, a new study finds a host of new uses for old drugs, an artificial chromosome looks set to remedy muscular dystrophy and chemists discover diamonds being made in the flame of a candle...

Easy enough.

 

[Mick West]

OK, your words here: http://contrailscience.com/contrails-and-chemtrails-the-ifaq/

Contrails, which are ice particles vs chemtrails?
Some people say the longer lasting trails are “chemtrails”, but there’s no evidence to support this, as some trails have always lasted a long time.

Content from External Source

I say chemtrails are invisible... can you see the carbon black coming out the back of the plane? How about the aluminum and barium? I can't.

What's wrong with my answer?

Is there barium in gasoline?
Not according to Google, except if added via fuel additives, and those mentioned were old, and related to diesel. You might get some barium in the exhaust from barium additives in the engine lubricants, such as Barium Hydroxide Octahydrate.

Content from External Source

Google is a terrible source... use the IPCC
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_sr/?src=/climate/ipcc/aviation/035.htm
3.2.3.2 Metal Particles

Aircraft jet engines also directly emit metal particles. Their sources include engine erosion and the combustion of fuel containing trace metal impurities or metal particles that enter the exhaust with the fuel (Chapter 7). Metal particles-comprising elements such as Al, Ti, Cr, Fe, Ni, and Ba-are estimated to be present at the parts per billion by volume (ppbv) level at nozzle exit planes (CIAP, 1975; Fordyce and Sheibley, 1975). The corresponding concentrations of 107​ to 108​ particles/kg fuel (assuming 1-mm radius; see below) are much smaller than for soot. Although metals have been found as residuals in cirrus and contrail ice particles (Chen et al., 1998; Petzold et al., 1998; Twohy and Gandrud, 1998), their number and associated mass are considered too small to affect the formation or properties of more abundant volatile and soot plume aerosol particles.

Jolly good, this topic came up earlier on MB and we tracked that down. I've changed the CS post to

There are trace amounts of many metals, including barium, that found in crude oil and its products. Beyond this - not unless added via fuel additives, and those found on Google were old, and related to diesel. You might get some barium in the exhaust from barium additives in the engine lubricants, such as Barium Hydroxide Octahydrate.

Content from External Source

Do contrails create pollution?
No. Contrails are just ice clouds made from the water in plane engine exhausts. However some people consider this to be visual pollution. Plane engine exhaust is pollution just like car and truck exhaust is, however a plane creates the same amount of pollution wether it leaves a contrail or not.

Content from External Source

Completely insufficient answer based on my prior postings in this forum.

Why? What is wrong with it?

Is chemtrails responsible for acid rain?
If planes were spraying something like sulphur, then that would create acid rain. But there’s no evidence that they are. The human causes of acid rain are things like power stations, factories and transportation.

Content from External Source

Here's evidence:
http://www.kallmanclassic.com/micro...m/Bulzan CAAFI NASA Presentation 11-30-11.pdf

"Transportation" included jets. The question was abut "chemtrails", not jet exhaust. I've clarified it as:

If planes were spraying something like sulphur, then that would create acid rain. But there's no evidence that they are. The human causes of acid rain are things like power stations, factories and transportation (including normal jet exhaust)

Content from External Source

Do commercial airlines seed clouds on the west coast
Not in the usual sense of making low rain clouds rain more. But contrails are clouds, and the ones that persist are essentially”seeded” by the engine exhaust. But contrails are ice clouds, and don’t produce rain. They do sometimes make the sky overcast.

Content from External Source

They are seeded but don't produce rain? Hogwash: On the Possibility of Weather Modification by Aircraft Contrails, 1970:

A 43 year old paper that reads like pure speculation. If he were correct then it would have been studied quite extensively by now.

Any more? I appreciate rigor.

 

[Mick West]

Here's the discussion we had on barium in jet fuel:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1431-Is-Barium-in-Jet-Fuel

And the key finding was this list of metals in jet fuel, which you might find useful:

 

[Joe]

It seems rather odd that you think that because I have a site on contrails, you think I should be issuing statements about jet engine pollution.

The pollution is exactly the same regardless of if there is contrails or blue sky.

If I ran a blog on why the sky was blue, then should I also be issuing statements about pollution?

Problem is the sky is no longer blue . We had days of overcast haze and many contrails . Not typical Florida weather at all !

 

[Met Watch]

Problem is the sky is no longer blue . We had days of overcast haze and many contrails . Not typical Florida weather at all !

Just because you can't see blue doesn't mean it isn't. And Joe, when did these days occur? There is a massive MCS headed over Florida right now that is responsible for a fairly expansive cloud deck over the Sunshine State right now.

 

[Mick West]

Problem is the sky is no longer blue . We had days of overcast haze and many contrails . Not typical Florida weather at all !

Yeah, contrails sometimes spread out, causing haze. I covered that in the very first post on CS, in 2007:

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

 

[Cairenn]

I don't think he read the naked scientist post that he keeps using

Chris - So what is the mechanism behind this then? What actually causes the aeroplane to make this phenomena occur?

Andy - So around the tips of propeller blades for propeller aircraft and for turbo prop aircraft, there is expansion of the air, that’s the engines pushing back behind it, and the expansion process causes cooling. Cooling then can cause cloud droplets, which are at the ambient temperature anytime they're below about -10 degrees centigrade, to cool to the point where they spontaneously freeze at -40. And this is a well-known phenomenon of spontaneous freezing. It’s just that the aircraft, just like a weather modification activities, act as a nucleus that provide ice crystals and these crystals then seed the cloud.

Content from External Source

It is ICE and it can be caused by a prop plane as well, not carbon black.

 

[MikeC]

I say chemtrails are invisible... can you see the carbon black coming out the back of the plane?

sometimes -

 

[Joe]

Just because you can't see blue doesn't mean it isn't. And Joe, when did these days occur? There is a massive MCS headed over Florida right now that is responsible for a fairly expansive cloud deck over the Sunshine State right now.

Looks more like a bunch of contrails mixed in with a little rain that seems to be dissapating ? Yep and 20 years Iv never seen the weather like this in Florida as it has been it the last 2 years but Ill stop since Im veering off topic maybe ? Like the marine layer in SCal in June that usually doesn't burn off till noon . If that still happens ?

 

[scombrid]

Yeah, contrails sometimes spread out, causing haze. I covered that in the very first post on CS, in 2007:

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

We've been covered in cirrus clouds blowing off of convection to our west for most of this week thanks to a vigorous jet associated with an upper level low. Right now a rather big MCS that generated a lot of the cirrus clouds that were over us yesterday is moving across the state generating rain and thunderstorms. Sure there are abundant contrails too, but those are being caused by the weather, not the other way around.

 

[TWCobra]

Jim, it seems pretty obvious what your tack is here. You believe in chemtrails, primarily as a means of weather modification and geo-engineering, but can't prove their existence. So you are going down the path of claiming massive pollution and weather modification due to jet exhausts as a backdoor means of achieving your goal.

The flaw in the argument is that while no-one disputes that there is pollution in jet exhausts, the general effects are a minor portion of the overall problem and the weather modification link is tenuous at best and generally recognised as needing much more research.

I laughed when you had a go at Mick for not knowing exactly "What they are Spraying", because you didn't know exactly either and came HERE to find out. Yet without that knowledge you maintain a position not backed up by any science.

You re-hash material that has been thoroughly explained or de-bunked before, not realising that as soon as you bring it up here, the eyes of your readership begin to instantly glaze over.

You bring up "Owning the Weather in 2025"? Seriously? An UNCLASSIFIED thought experiment submitted by a student at the USAF War College.. (you do realise it is only 2013 don't you?) with a disclaimer that never seems to be read by those like you who are desperate to believe it is a high level policy document outlining CURRENT American warfare plans. If you truly believe that is what it is, then say so to make the blocking process so much more expedient.

I am bound by the politeness policy here so I can't tell you precisely what I think of your ideas, suffice to say that you really do need to re-evaluate your position on many, many topics.

 

[TWCobra]

and another thing...."Terra-forming" means creating another Earth -like environment. By definition you cannot Terra-Form on Earth!

 

[Mick West]

and another thing...."Terra-forming" means creating another Earth -like environment. By definition you cannot Terra-Form on Earth!

Somewhat related, the original meaning of "geoengineering" was to do Terra-scale engineering feats, like dam the Mediterranean, or green the Sahara.

 

[lotek]

Jim do you own a car?

 

[TWCobra]

Somewhat related, the original meaning of "geoengineering" was to do Terra-scale engineering feats, like dam the Mediterranean, or green the Sahara.

Ok Mick but this definion concurs with my idea of the word.

terraforming

[COLOR=#878787 !important]Verb[/COLOR] (esp. in science fiction) Transform (a planet) so as to resemble the earth, esp. so that it can support human life

Content from External Source

 

[rezn8d]

I laughed when you had a go at Mick for not knowing exactly "What they are Spraying", because you didn't know exactly either and came HERE to find out. Yet without that knowledge you maintain a position not backed up by any science.

Many people go to church to learn about God, despite any "scientific evidence" of his existence. It's called a belief, and I will have my beliefs until I see evidence that changes them.

You re-hash material that has been thoroughly explained or de-bunked before, not realising that as soon as you bring it up here, the eyes of your readership begin to instantly glaze over.

Noone here has debunked anything (everything) that I have posted so far, so what does this mean aside from pointing out the obvious stupidity of the masses?

You bring up "Owning the Weather in 2025"? Seriously? An UNCLASSIFIED thought experiment submitted by a student at the USAF War College.. (you do realise it is only 2013 don't you?) with a disclaimer that never seems to be read by those like you who are desperate to believe it is a high level policy document outlining CURRENT American warfare plans. If you truly believe that is what it is, then say so to make the blocking process so much more expedient.

I thought I did when i pointed out all the military documentation saying let's make AF2025 happen. They appear to be on schedule... now if they could just get geoengineering SRM on the books, Operation Defenses through Weather Control in 2030 becomes a reality overnight.

I am bound by the politeness policy here so I can't tell you precisely what I think of your ideas, suffice to say that you really do need to re-evaluate your position on many, many topics.

Suggestion noted. My main focus is weather modification, I acknowledge that there are too many wild claims regarding doping aviation fuel and "inadvertent cloud-seeding" for me to leave chemtrails alone. They are inevitably intertwined. The Air Force wants to block the skies to protect against DE weapons and spy satellites, and have clearly stated they want lightning guns and hurricane control. They are on schedule.
http://terraforminginc.com/weather-control/index.html

 

[Cairenn]

Where is your evidence of that "The Air Force wants to block the skies to protect against DE weapons and spy satellites, and have clearly stated they want lightning guns and hurricane control." A decades old thought paper is NOT evidence. Do you have any thing else that states that?

You repeatedly stated that 'chem trail's were not a concern to you, until your 'story' was exposed by your own posts.

It seems that you pick and choose what you want to use for evidence, and then abandon that tack, when it is proven wrong.

 

[TWCobra]

Jim, do you know what the term "unclassified" means? I can tell you have no idea about the workings of the military.

I thought I did when i pointed out all the military documentation saying let's make AF2025 happen. They appear to be on schedule... now if they could just get geoengineering SRM on the books, Operation Defenses through Weather Control in 2030 becomes a reality overnight.

That is not military documentation. Once again....

AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE
AIR UNIVERSITY
Operational Defenses through Weather Control in 2030
by
Michael C. Boger, Major, United States Air Force
A Research Report Submitted to the Faculty
In Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirements

The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the author(s) and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US government or the Department of Defense. In accordance with Air Force Instruction 51-303, it is not copyrighted, but is the property of the United States government.

Approved for public release, distribution unlimited

a. REPORT unclassified b. ABSTRACT unclassified c. THIS PAGE unclassified

If such a program existed serving officers would not see it unless they have a need to know. A USAF Major doing a staff course would not know about it either and certainly would not be allowed to broadcast it via an assignment. The idea is ludicrous to anyone except those desperate to grasp at any straw to support their theory. You certainly would not see it.

It's called a belief, and I will have my beliefs until I see evidence that changes them.

The question begged there of course is do you have any evidence as a foundation to these beliefs... most reading would suggest no. So why should we listen to you?

You are deluding yourself when you claim nothing you have presented hasn't been debunked. But then again you point out that they are just beliefs in the first place. Once again, why should we listen to you?

 

[scombrid]

Looks more like a bunch of contrails mixed in with a little rain that seems to be dissapating ?

Convection associated with shortwaves tend to fizzle like that when they run out of convective available potential energy (CAPE).

Yep and 20 years Iv never seen the weather like this in Florida as it has been it the last 2 years

We had almost this exact same set up in the first week of May 2009. If you look at the regional radar right now you'll see a convergent band of precip pointed at JAX with flood watches in those counties. In May 2009 we had such a band set up off Volusia/Flagler under a very similar upper level and surface pattern. Bunnel got over 30 inches of rain in a day or two. DAB recorded it's second highest 2 day rainfall event. Second only to a stalled tropical system that occurred in October many years ago.

 

[lotek]

Problem is the sky is no longer blue .

[...]. Any statement such as this is what is known as a 'good ol' days fallacy'. they are everywhere, they are nearly always wrong, and they make me sick.

no one used to starve
no one used to get sick
no one used to die
no one used to have sex
no one used to be gay
no one used to need school
no one used to quit school
no one used to get aids
no one used to have allergies
no one used to have autism
no one used to need vaccines
no one used to be lazy
no one used to blah
no one used to blah blah

its more likely your eyes have changed, or your memory, or your desire to remember.
Anyway, NOx plays a much bigger roll in the smogging of air than any of this crap ever theoretically could....

You lack the analytically tools necessary to determine if the sky is as blue as it used to be... and lets pretend for a moment you did have such an ability, there are countless reasons which are studied out in the open as to why it may look off, none of which require any link to this hokus pokus.

------------------------------------

Jim, do you own and operate a motor vehicle?

 

[Mick West]

People naturally remember the sky as more blue than it actually was. It's science. See:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/494-Debunked-The-Sky-Was-Bluer

 

[Mick West]

sometimes -

Sometimes more than others

 

[scombrid]

Skies are crazy blue here in Florida. Other than when we are having lots of fires we have a LOT less particulate pollution than the mainland to our north. In the summer when humidity is maxed out we often have almost no haze at all, even if there is a high cirrus deck or contrails. You can see thunderheads 100 miles away. I can go up in the fire tower in Deleon Springs and see the high rises 22 miles away in Daytona or watch launches from the cape 66 miles away (when they are early enough in the day that the diurnal cumulus field hasn't developed.) Up in Virginia where Mom and Dad live it is not uncommon for it to be difficult to see across the James River (5 miles across at Newport News) in the summer when the pollution gets trapped under high pressure.

Interestingly, I bet some people may be noticing more contrails where low level particulates have been reduced by modern air quality standards. You can't see contrails that aren't directly overhead when there's a lot of haze from NOx etc...

 

[Joe]

[...]. Any statement such as this is what is known as a 'good ol' days fallacy'. they are everywhere, they are nearly always wrong, and they make me sick.

no one used to starve
no one used to get sick
no one used to die
no one used to have sex
no one used to be gay
no one used to need school
no one used to quit school
no one used to get aids
no one used to have allergies
no one used to have autism
no one used to need vaccines
no one used to be lazy
no one used to blah
no one used to blah blah

its more likely your eyes have changed, or your memory, or your desire to remember.
Anyway, NOx plays a much bigger roll in the smogging of air than any of this crap ever theoretically could....

You lack the analytically tools necessary to determine if the sky is as blue as it used to be... and lets pretend for a moment you did have such an ability, there are countless reasons which are studied out in the open as to why it may look off, none of which require any link to this hokus pokus.

------------------------------------

Jim, do you own and operate a motor vehicle?

[...] Im not saying they arent blue just less blue and more gray haze . They are geoengineering or whitening our skies ! Period !

 

[Joe]

What is this picture of ?

 

[scombrid]

A rocket launch photographed through low clouds. Sky between the clouds is blue. Judging by how white the rocket trail appears the transparency of the atmosphere was good apart from the low clouds.

 

[scombrid]

[...] Im not saying they arent blue just less blue and more gray haze . They are geoengineering or whitening our skies ! Period !

Funny, I live just a couple counties north of you and I'm not seeing "geo-engineering" or "whitening our skies".

When the troposphere is cloud free, the sky is blue as blue can be.

 

[George B]

[...] Im not saying they arent blue just less blue and more gray haze . They are geoengineering or whitening our skies ! Period !

David Keith on the Australian ABC . . .
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3639096.htm

Transcript
TONY JONES, PRESENTER: Earlier today I spoke with geoengineering expert David Keith, Professor of Applied Physics at the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. He was in Calgary, Canada.
David Keith, thanks for joining us.


TONY JONES: And final question, because you probably - if someone decided to do this, even if a group of nations decided to do this, there'd be tremendous scepticism in the public and you would, I imagine, get widespread protests, particularly when people realise that with sulphate particles in the atmosphere you'd actually change the colour of the sky, which has a really big psychological effect on people, you would imagine.
How serious first of all would that change of colour be if you really were able to do it on a global scale and would you expect protests?
DAVID KEITH: I think the change of colour would probably be invisible. I think it wouldn't happen. So people have published papers where they get that, but only where they assume a quite large amount of geoengineering. They assume that geoengineering compensates all of the effect of climate change, which I think is a kind of nonsense policy.

Content from External Source