Switching on and off of trails?

Just asking but some of the people here seem very hostile to people that consider chemtrailing may be happening.

Can we blame people for thinking it is possible when even mainstream newspapers have reported on the existence of black-op projects?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

Hostile? How so? People see to be very open to considering your questions, and offering you explanations for the things you have seen.

But, why are these germ war tests in any way linked to what you call "chemtrails"? Do they look similar?

And who has ever denied the existence of black-op projects?
 
Just a question.

Do contrails come from the engines and/or wings?

Gary,
See following for aerodynamic contrails in close up.



This was filmed by the USAF aircrew member that filmed the 'chemtrail spoof' video that you probably have also come across? See the videos on his channel. He is also open to taking questions.

Video title.

'The original "KC-10 spreading chemtrails" spoof video'

From

https://www.youtube.com/user/USAFFEKC10A
 
Hostile? How so? People see to be very open to considering your questions, and offering you explanations for the things you have seen.

But, why are these germ war tests in any way linked to what you call "chemtrails"? Do they look similar?

And who has ever denied the existence of black-op projects?


I have seen some comments that are emotional reaction to people that they think are crazy for even thinking anybody would do chemtrailing. People are crazy enough. There are things on public record that have happened just as insane but because they happen often normalcy bias effects their perception to how horrific it is. But most people here seem nice and genuine. Hence Why I am still here myself. I just want closure as anybody would but the argument would be that nobody could test every trail to see if they are all legit. So there is always possibility one or more could be. Ok now I am rambling lol.
 
I never said it was evidence. You are putting words in my fingers. I am answering a direct question with my opinion.

If it's not evidence,then why bring it up?

Here are the questions you were asked:

1)Can you explain why clouds have abrupt edges - who turns them on and off?
2)Why would the globalists want us dead?
3)Who would they take their money from or buy their stuff?
4)Whats the point in being in control if there is nobody to control?

Please explain how your response expressed your opinion on those points.
 
Last edited:
Gary,
See following for aerodynamic contrails in close up.



This was filmed by the USAF aircrew member that filmed the 'chemtrail spoof' video that you probably have also come across? See the videos on his channel. He is also open to taking questions.

Video title.

'The original "KC-10 spreading chemtrails" spoof video'

From

https://www.youtube.com/user/USAFFEKC10A


So, to clarify on your answer, they come from the wings generally where the engines are?

I am just asking because the ones I have seen appear to come from the engines more than the wings. But that was from a distance so I am not claiming they actually come from the engines.
 
Just asking but some of the people here seem very hostile to people that consider chemtrailing may be happening.

Can we blame people for thinking it is possible when even mainstream newspapers have reported on the existence of black-op projects?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

You are again conflating the idea that covert actions sometimes take place with "chemtrials". That is NOT evidence that the trails we see in the sky are anything other than normal contrails.

People may get a bit "hostile" after the same NON-evidence for chemtrails is touted for a decade while all the science about the formation of normal contrails is consistently ignored.
 
Last edited:
So, to clarify on your answer, they come from the wings generally where the engines are?

I am just asking because the ones I have seen appear to come from the engines more than the wings. But that was from a distance so I am not claiming they actually come from the engines.

Sorry to butt in, but NO. Aerodynamic contrails can be produced by virtually ANY part of the aircraft(though most commonly the wings or wingtips). Exhaust contrails come from the engines.
 
You are again conflating the idea that covert actions sometimes take place with "chemtrials". That is NOT evidence that the trails we see in the sky are anything other than normal contrails.

People may get a bit "hostile" after the same NON-evidence for chemtrails is touted for a decade while all the science about the formation of normal contrails is consistently ignored.

I didnt claim that previous black-op poisoning of citizens was evidence I say again. Please stop claiming contrary to what I said.

And there seems to also be some evidence for the existence of them. It works both ways from both 'camps'. And no I dont want to discuss chemtrail evidence. I have been things to do with my time like helping people with life.
 
Gary Cook- you said this:
"I have asked around and weather speciealists agree that this cant be the atmostphere. It is just too sudden."

You were then asked this specific question by Jay Reynolds:
"Which weather specialists?"

I don't see where you answered that question. You seem to be claiming to have gotten info from an authoritative source. Would you please point out your answer or answer it now?
 
Last edited:
I didnt claim that previous black-op poisoning of citizens was evidence I say again. Please stop claiming contrary to what I said.

And there seems to also be some evidence for the existence of them. It works both ways from both 'camps'. And no I dont want to discuss chemtrail evidence. I have been things to do with my time like helping people with life.

Why do you keep mentioning things which you imply are relevant, but then deny they are evidence on the subject at hand?

You don't want to discuss chemtrail evidence? The first thing you brought up here, the starting and stopping of trails, is commonly touted as "evidence of chemtrails". Why else did you even ask about it? You PRESENTED supposed evidence of chemtrails and asked for discussion.
 
Why do you keep mentioning things which you imply are relevant, but then deny they are evidence on the subject at hand?

You don't want to discuss chemtrail evidence? The first thing you brought up here, the starting and stopping of trails, is commonly touted as "evidence of chemtrails". Why else did you even ask about it? You PRESENTED supposed evidence of chemtrails and asked for discussion.


Because I was curious to what peoples response here would be. Surely that is obvious.

My point about previous poisoning of the population by government being reported as was just alluding to, that people should not be so hostile to others just for questioning things. Ignoring evidence is not good though obviously. Then again I could say that few here seems bothered that governments, including western ones, kill their own people. Just an observation. Correct me if I am wrong.

oh and when I wrote "here". I mean on the forum in general Not on this thread as such. People here have been nice to me but some of the comments on other threads about so called conspiracy theorists are not exactly nice.

I digress a bit though. Thanks for the information peeps. I will digest it.
 
Last edited:
Because I was curious to what peoples response here would be. Surely that is obvious.

You're being obtuse and disingenuous. My question was in the context of YOUR statement that you "don't want to discuss chemtrail evidence" when that is clearly what your original post was asking about.

My point about previous poisoning of the population by government being reported as was just alluding to, that people should not be so hostile to others just for questioning things.

No one is being hostile simply because of you questioning things.

Ignoring evidence is not good though obviously. Then again I could say that few here seems bothered that governments, including western ones, kill their own people. Just an observation. Correct me if I am wrong.

You're wrong and your "observation" is downright insulting. What does this have to do with trails in the sky starting and stopping?

oh and when I wrote "here". I mean on the forum in general Not on this thread as such. People here have been nice to me but some of the comments on other threads about so called conspiracy theorists are not exactly nice.

A significant percentage of "conspiracy theorists" are simply taking advantage of people through fear-mongering. I don't find that to be "nice" at all.

I digress a bit though. Thanks for the information peeps. I will digest it.

Does this mean you are going to disappear without answering the questions put to you?
 
I have seen some comments that are emotional reaction to people that they think are crazy for even thinking anybody would do chemtrailing. People are crazy enough. .
Gary, most folks who believe in chemtrails have had one or more friends or family members say directly to them that their idea is crazy.
I've seen them say so many times. Some of the families have come here asking for help.
Besides just being polite and trying to get along, is it wrong to tell someone they are believing something crazy if it is?
 
people should not be so hostile to others just for questioning things. Ignoring evidence is not good though obviously. .
There is a very good reason why we were all told the stories about Chicken Little and The Boy Who Cried Wolf. Fabricating 'evidence' and concocting hoaxes is not good, either.
 
... Then again I could say that few here seems bothered that governments, including western ones, kill their own people. Just an observation. Correct me if I am wrong.
....
This is not a forum devoted to discussing how upset we are about various things, it's a forum for seeing if there is evidence related to a claim or not.
Please show the posts that led to your observation that few are bothered when governments kill their own people, if you wish to throw something like that at us.
 
And there seems to also be some evidence for the existence of them. It works both ways from both 'camps'.

That's the problem though, for the generally accepted conspiracy definition of 'chemtrails' there isn't any evidence that can't be easily shown to have a common and prosaic explanation. The entire chemtrail 'movement' is rooted in fundamental ignorance of certain aspects of aviation and meterology, which is why people who do understand those things reject it. That sounds harsh but it is demonstrably true.
 
So, to clarify on your answer, they come from the wings generally where the engines are?

I am just asking because the ones I have seen appear to come from the engines more than the wings. But that was from a distance so I am not claiming they actually come from the engines.

As Hama Neggs already stated above, almost any part of the aircraft can generate a contrail, be it aerodynamic or temperature generated. In addition to the wings and engines, various vents and drains can generate contrails, or the exhaust from the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU, usually located in the tail section of the fuselage).
 
As Hama Neggs already stated above, almost any part of the aircraft can generate a contrail, be it aerodynamic or temperature generated. In addition to the wings and engines, various vents and drains can generate contrails, or the exhaust from the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU, usually located in the tail section of the fuselage).

While that is true, almost all contrails you see high in the sky are going to be engine exhaust contrails.
 
While that is true, almost all contrails you see high in the sky are going to be engine exhaust contrails.

From the ground certainly, I only mentioned the extra sources because I have seen them identified in zoom images of contrailing aircraft as "suspicious" :)
 
Like i said I am 50/50 On chemtrails, but from what I know of what is being uncovered in the banking world, I would be scared if I was them. the level of fraud is monumental. But not a story for this thread.


What does one have to do with the other, and if Hama NEggs is "puting words in your fingers" why do does what you know of one thing have to do with the other?
 
One question. While I am here today. If they are exhaust contrails what does the exhaust contain? Chemicals, no?
 
Are they toxic? While not exactly on topic of debunking something of course, that is concerning to me. On a basic environmental level.

It's engine exhaust. Like from a car engine. It's there regardless of if you can see the white trail or not.
 
One question. While I am here today. If they are exhaust contrails what does the exhaust contain? Chemicals, no?
Water, CO2, NOx, CO, soot. Basically the same for all hydrocarbon combustion.

When chemtrails get debunked, this is pretty much the standard fall-back position.
If yo are concerned about pollution, probably the worst thing you can do is to associate that legitimate concern with a hoax like chemtrails.
 
I am not stupid enough to go, LOOK THEY ARE CHEMTRAILS THEN!, lol.

But that is scary. Considering I have seen them completely blanket the sky before. At least a couple time s a week.
 
As with the burning of any hydro-carbon there is some sulfur, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and other compounds in the exhaust. I don't believe anyone in this forum would dispute the fact that pollution from burning fossil fuels is a real concern. However, this does not make it an intentional nefarious plot by some unnamed powers- that- be to reduce the population, hide Nibiru, warm the climate, cool the climate, etc., those promoting the chemtrail hoax can't even agree what it's about.
 
Water, CO2, NOx, CO, soot. Basically the same for all hydrocarbon combustion.
I am not stupid enough to go, LOOK THEY ARE CHEMTRAILS THEN!, lol.

But that is scary. Considering I have seen them completely blanket the sky before. At least a couple time s a week.
Over a decade ago, I spoke to a WWII pilot who said the same thing.
"We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. " - Willard Reese- 457th Bomb Group

"Contrails were so thick that they became clouds. We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. We flew a different route coming back than going in partly to avoid the contrail clouds that we created. There are some pictures of contrails on my web site - none of these are shown to be very heavy but there were time when we were near the end of the bomber stream and the contrails were so dense that it was no different than flying in clouds. A thousand or more planes (4000 internal combustion engines) can make a lot of contrail at 25000 feet or more."

http://goodsky.homestead.com/files/deception5.html

There is similar traffic every day and the engines are hundreds of times larger.
 
As with the burning of any hydro-carbon there is some sulfur, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and other compounds in the exhaust. I don't believe anyone in this forum would dispute the fact that pollution from burning fossil fuels is a real concern. However, this does not make it an intentional nefarious plot by some unnamed powers- that- be to reduce the population, hide Nibiru, warm the climate, cool the climate, etc., those promoting the chemtrail hoax can't even agree what it's about.

Good point although unnecessarily demeaning. Most chemtrail truthers do what they do because they care about people and have witnessed real government plots to hurt people in the past. Since the point of this forum seems to be to help people who are in despair about conspiracy theories I am here being polite to people and asking questions. t least my mind is open enough to questions both sides as the camp, as it were.
 
Over a decade ago, I spoke to a WWII pilot who said the same thing.
"We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. " - Willard Reese- 457th Bomb Group

"Contrails were so thick that they became clouds. We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. We flew a different route coming back than going in partly to avoid the contrail clouds that we created. There are some pictures of contrails on my web site - none of these are shown to be very heavy but there were time when we were near the end of the bomber stream and the contrails were so dense that it was no different than flying in clouds. A thousand or more planes (4000 internal combustion engines) can make a lot of contrail at 25000 feet or more."

http://goodsky.homestead.com/files/deception5.html

There is similar traffic every day and the engines are hundreds of times larger.


I am not quite sure what your point is but that is interesting to know that was happening in WW2 also.
 
But that is scary. Considering I have seen them completely blanket the sky before. At least a couple time s a week.


As Mick mentioned but its important to understand...the chemicals are there whether the trails are there or not. The plane emits the same exhaust even if no contrail is formed.

What you "see" is simply ice. Ice isn't scary.
 
Most chemtrail truthers do what they do because they care about people and have witnessed real government plots to hurt people in the past.

But pretty much everyone cares about people, and does not trust the government. So you can't say that chemtrailers do it because of that. There has to be something else.
 
But pretty much everyone cares about people, and does not trust the government. So you can't say that chemtrailers do it because of that. There has to be something else.

Indeed. Some of them have mental health issues but personally I treat people humanly. Liberal types especially can be really nasty to anybody who doesnt follow the maintream status quo.
 
As Mick mentioned but its important to understand...the chemicals are their whether the trails are there or not. The plane emits the same exhaust even if no contrail is formed.

What you "see" is simply ice. Ice isn't scary.

No but soot etc completely blanketing the sky is, to me. But Like I said I dont claim that to be chemtrail related as such.
 
I am here being polite to people and asking questions. t least my mind is open enough to questions both sides as the camp, as it were.

Can you explain why you are refusing to answer polite questions- specifically, about the alleged "weather specialists" you claim to have consulted with?
 
Can you explain why you are refusing to answer polite questions- specifically, about the alleged "weather specialists" you claim to have consulted with?

Because I cant name drop people without their permission. That is basic politeness. But I don't think I submitted what they told me as evidence in to the debate here. I am listening to everything I have been told here and you seem like good people with good intentions. As am I. I don't think hysteria helps anybody.
 
Back
Top