TWCobra
Senior Member.
Actually it was removed by FB as a "hate post". You gotta laugh...
After I posted the origins of a couple of her pictures, she blocked me. I did not accept her friend request on FB. There is no way I would allow her to get access to my friends.
It's getting very busy out there.What has changed, the fuel mixture, the jet engine, the emission system?
Hi guys, I dropped by in Nov 2012 and vented my thoughts that “chemtrails” were a regular feature of the airscape.
Ross Marsden and Jay Reynolds gave me some food for thought and I told Ross I would take some time to look at it, micro the bugger, then get back to him. I have reached a conclusion…for now.
I don’t believe you could logistically mask a clandestine global operation that regularly puts aircraft over suburbia; someone in the chain would identify it as conspiratorial.
I have spoken to commercial and private pilots and none buy the chemtrails scenario.
So given that my only unresolved issue is the frequency and appearance of these persistent contrails. I am still not convinced that they were a regular occurrence throughout my life, as I mentioned I have been an amateur astronomer since my teens and for most of my life contrails were a rarity, now they are the norm.
What has changed, the fuel mixture, the jet engine, the emission system?
You have delivered the explanation with your observation. What is a cloud other than water (or ice) that becomes visible because the air can't hold it anymore as vapor?I know and have seen that often planes fly 3 quarters of the way across the sky then just before the get to a lone cloud the CHEMTRAILS start. Just after the lone cloud the chemtrails stop.
I think most peoples memories would agree with me.
Off topic but why would chemtrails stop and start? Has anyone tried to explain that? It would seem to be a very inefficient way to work.
Bored pilots, playing with switches in the cockpit?Off topic but why would chemtrails stop and start? Has anyone tried to explain that? It would seem to be a very inefficient way to work.
Thank you for your responses. To answer your questions. Yes if traditional contrails used to stop and start in the middle of blue skies and expand into large masses and start and stop over lone clouds in the blue sky then yes it would obviously been seen as natural.
John Massaria has posted his version of the events which were moved to the closed thread. It is rambling and somewhat incoherent, as well as containing numerous inaccuracies and misleading statements.
I also see that despite having taken down the video in embarrassment from his own site, John Massaria is still personally promoting his original hoax video on other Youtube channels, complete with the ballast barrel hoax pictures as he originally created it:
Michael J. Murphy is also promoting the original version of Massaria's "Ballast Barrel" hoax video:
https://www.facebook.com/WhatintheWorldAreTheySpraying/posts/193177907472544
Massaria says he has allied with Dane Wigington, who is sill carrying the hoax story that claims Youtube removed John Masaria's original Ballast Barrel Hoax video:
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-interview-pulled-from-utube/
However, Wigington's website no longer hosts a copy of John Massaria's original Ballast Barrel Hoax video:
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/videos/the-most-important-topic-for-everyone-in-2013.mp4
=================================================
So, what we have here is evidence that John Massaria, Michael J. Murphy, and Dane Wigington are knowingly participating in what should henceforth always be referred to as:
John Massaria's Ballast Barrel Hoax video
We need to recognize that there is no reasoning with people like this who are willing to knowingly pervert photos of ordinary equipment used to safety test passenger airliners to promote this hoax. These people are irredeemable, there is no cooperation with them, no sweet-talk, no explanation, and no changing them once they reach this point.
They are morally bankrupt. All you can do is to fight them with the truth, backed up with documented facts.
Their worst fear is the exposure of what they are doing, and they will make every effort to prevent that.
Do not waver in your opposition, or else they and the lies they represent win by your default.
That page lists no organisations that reject AGW. It simply states the facts, & some possible consequences.Just for reference, here's a list of all the national or international scientific bodies who agree that global warming is a hoax:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Global...dies_that_reject_anthropogenic_global_warming
If you saw a wake start and stop unexpectedly behind a boat in the water you'd think it was strange and unnatural.
read the real deal here not a google w/e
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7413145.PN.&OS=PN/7413145&RS=PN/7413145
Search that past the top part (which was pasted here in an earlier comment).
Search the document for 'weather'.
Realize that Evergreen is partially owned by the CIA so how many they 'sell' is a moot point.
Example:
2. The system of claim 1 wherein the material tanks are configured to contain material selected from the group consisting of at least a water, gel, decontamination compound, weather modification compound, oil spill treatment compound, and a firefighting compound.
There are no less than FIVE mentions of weather modification.
Now breathe because either way, there is nothing we can do about it.
... and their misrepresentation as "chemtrail" tanks, etc.The thread is about the photos of ballast barrels, firefighting equipment, etc.
Realize that Evergreen is partially owned by the CIA so how many they 'sell' is a moot point.
RE: The patent you linked (yes, it mentions "barrels", so is at least tangentially related to this thread topic...a tiny bit).Evergreen International Airlines (McMinnville, Oregon and Marana, Arizona) despite denials of rumors by senior management, in the waning hours of December 31, 2013, filed for voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in a federal court in the state of Delaware. The company will be liquidated.
There are no less than FIVE mentions of weather modification.
Now breathe because either way, there is nothing we can do about it.
"Weather modification" explained (from link above):Cloud seeding, a form of weather modification, is the attempt to change the amount or type of precipitation that falls from clouds...
That single aircraft has been seen everywhere.Evergreen
Because it's no longer in existence?there is nothing we can do about it.
That single aircraft has been seen everywhere.
It's everywhere, worldwide, at the same time.
read the real deal here not a google w/e
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7413145.PN.&OS=PN/7413145&RS=PN/7413145
Search that past the top part (which was pasted here in an earlier comment).
Search the document for 'weather'.
Realize that Evergreen is partially owned by the CIA so how many they 'sell' is a moot point.
Example:
2. The system of claim 1 wherein the material tanks are configured to contain material selected from the group consisting of at least a water, gel, decontamination compound, weather modification compound, oil spill treatment compound, and a firefighting compound.
There are no less than FIVE mentions of weather modification.
Now breathe because either way, there is nothing we can do about it.
We don't have to, sunshine. (Great alibi idea).Can you prove it was just the one plane?
You need more sarcasm indicators in your posts.If I may just bring in some wisdom from the MH17/370 threads....you keep multiple copies of everything (there's another MH370 still in a hangar in Tel Aviv, remember? and another in the Indian Ocean and another just got shot over Ukraine). You keep multiples, so if one is seen doing something bad, you have the ALIBI of the other one(s) being very visibly somewhere else at the time. You can even get 2 doing the wrong thing and use them to alibi each other, as long as the wrongs are in different jurisdictions, ie the alibis won't clash in the exact same court room.
Can you prove it was just the one plane?
Can you prove it was just the one plane?