Global March Against Chemtrails and Geoengineering

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Well in my case the trails are already here before the rain does. Then we don't get no rain. This has been going on for a year. Well I was trying to upload some pics and its not working. i'll have to get some help and do this later.
What you describe, contrails seen preceding (before) rain, is common. Cirrus clouds in general often precede rain, so contrail/cirrus before rain is nothing unusual.

The weather records show that Corpus Christi does actually receive rainfall. Just under 3 inches for July.
You get rain.
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/climate/getclimate.php?wfo=crp
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
Well in my case the trails are already here before the rain does. Then we don't get no rain. This has been going on for a year. Well I was trying to upload some pics and its not working. i'll have to get some help and do this later.

Yes, that's because the humidity is increasing in the upper atmosphere after a longer period of heat, a period that usually ends with a cold front. You are not likely to see much clouds before persistent contrails (usually they are cirrus clouds as Jay pointed out), but that is because jet engines are much more efficient in condensing and freezing water compared to the natural atmosphere.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
*intake of breath through teeth, while peering with one sceptical eye*
Let's say this... Jet engines operating there set up a process where-by condensation and freezing will occur where that would not happen naturally and spontaneously.
 

Skaredstiff

Member
The trouble is, you can't prove a negative. They would say that although we had proved the plane that was sampled was not spraying, we had not proved that all the others weren't.

Ok there is a simple fact that I do not understand? Why can't the zealous group like this muster the funds to do their own "non bought off" study? Seems like if there is so much zeal and outrage that every believer would be willing to kick in a few bucks? Yes they would for sure get contrails without chemicals, but if this is so wide spread as they say, it would not take very many samples to find a positive? Also, I think I have seen the calculation on this forum but would it not take coconspirators in the thousands to keep this a secret? I mean all the pilots, ground crew, chemical companies, and OMG the government ( we know how well they can keep secrets!). There is so much at stake here and seems so little effort other than cry baby bawling! Can't a federal whistle blower make tons of money by blowing the cover of this?
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Ok there is a simple fact that I do not understand? Why can't the zealous group like this muster the funds to do their own "non bought off" study?

I truly think that a significant number of them really don't want answers, surprisingly not even answers to their own conspiracy theory.

Think about it. If they fail, they lose.

If a leader fails, he/she is no longer a reliable leader and loses status.
Then there is the financial loss, not any for the rank and file but some of the leadership actually do derive some income.
Then there are the 'excusers', those who use this as a crutch, a way to blame their personal inadequacies/failures on something. If they solve the chemtrails conundrum, they don't have that excuse anymore.
Then there are the 'goes-a-longers', those for whom chemtrails is a small but integral part of an entire set of accompanying beliefs that support each other and the loss of one brings the others into question.
There are other reasons. General distrust, even of each other means that no one trusts anyone else to hold the money or spend it wisely.
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
I agree with Jays summation. Even just contemplating doing a test is a tacit admission that they might be wrong. As we can see from many of the prominent activists, expressing doubt on their pages in a quick trip to social media purgatory.

I had a conversation with Paul Mac of Australians against Chemtrails and his position was that I needed to make "some pretty frank admissions" before he would even consider working with me in an attempt to find some way to test these trails.

I guess that meant admitting to chemtrailing before Paul would consider testing to see if it was actually happening. Needless to say, the entire process never went ahead.
 

Skaredstiff

Member
Deep breath through the nose! It is a shame that there is no desire to get the facts? I guess the disinformation from both sides will continue. Oh well those who do not believe will die, those that do will die, those that are spraying will die. Hard to believe that there is not an antidote ( or there is?) to save all the CT folks? The antidote that the sprayers have inoculated there selected few with? They could fool the plot by immunizing their select few! Ohhhh. Most if them do not want vaccines either. I will party on like its the end if the world. No worry I'm happy!
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
Deep breath through the nose! It is a shame that there is no desire to get the facts? I guess the disinformation from both sides will continue. Oh well those who do not believe will die, those that do will die, those that are spraying will die. Hard to believe that there is not an antidote ( or there is?) to save all the CT folks? The antidote that the sprayers have inoculated there selected few with? They could fool the plot by immunizing their select few! Ohhhh. Most if them do not want vaccines either. I will party on like its the end if the world. No worry I'm happy!

You were already given facts. You were told about the tests that have already been done.

There have been some studies which sampled directly from persistent contrails with aircraft. Such as Petzold et al. (1998), "Elemental composition and morphology of ice-crystal residual particles in cirrus clouds and contrails" in the journal Atmospheric Research. They weren't specifically testing the "chemtrails" idea, because as you say, there's no scientific reason to even suspect that it might be true. But they did analyze the elements found in persisting trails, as well as natural cirrus for comparison. As you might expect, the results were consistent with the idea that they were persistent contrails caused by jet exhaust.

Referencing the underlined passage... Could you please point to a point of disinformation anywhere in the "Contrails and Chemtrails" part of this forum? Perhaps you might find something when you do a bit more reading around the forum.
 

Skaredstiff

Member
So
You were already given facts. You were told about the tests that have already been done.



Referencing the underlined passage... Could you please point to a point of disinformation anywhere in the "Contrails and Chemtrails" part of this forum? Perhaps you might find something when you do a bit more reading around the forum.

Sorry gang! Thought seasoned veterans would perceive the sarcasm? Noted on the links ( thank you!)and facts stated there and many other places I have looked. I do look around, not troll. Was really looking for the reaction to the vaccine comment? Seems like another area for the CTrail folks might just be convinced there is new world order hand in playing us as fools!Also realize that most folks here are serious and would never even think of disputeing something without facts. Thanks for calling it out! Now I will go look for the aluminum vaccine!
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
A german skeptic once proposed to fund a test. He was promptly banned.
I have often proposed that someone tries to make contact with a student in their final year of one of the environmental sciences. Under a different remit there are a number of different projects that could be done that could give credence to the hoax. No takers so far it seems.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
There are always those cabin air-circulation filters. They must be removed for cleaning (or replaced) as an item of periodic maintenance. Yeah?
The problem would be to obtain one, secure/establish the chain of custody, get it to the testing lab, and there you have it!

Booyah!
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
There are always those cabin air-circulation filters. They must be removed for cleaning (or replaced) as an item of periodic maintenance. Yeah?
The problem would be to obtain one, secure/establish the chain of custody, get it to the testing lab, and there you have it!

Booyah!

I've been suggesting this as well in anti-chemtrail groups on Facebook. So far no one has expressed a will to obtain such filter for analyze. I guess it require too much focus for these impatient believers to handle. Because frankly, people who believe in "chemtrails", or wacky conspiracy theories in general, tend to have a very short attention span. I guess the reason they believe is part due to not being able to get to the bottom of various claims.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
I've been suggesting this as well in anti-chemtrail groups on Facebook. So far no one has expressed a will to obtain such filter for analyze. I guess it require too much focus for these impatient believers to handle. Because frankly, people who believe in "chemtrails", or wacky conspiracy theories in general, tend to have a very short attention span. I guess the reason they believe is part due to not being able to get to the bottom of various claims.

I mentioned in the Max Bliss thread that no one has gone undercover. At this time of year in the UK there are a great many number of jobs dealing with the aircraft turnaround. It makes you wonder why this has not been exploited.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
I mentioned in the Max Bliss thread that no one has gone undercover. At this time of year in the UK there are a great many number of jobs dealing with the aircraft turnaround. It makes you wonder why this has not been exploited.

I think when we are heavily emotionally invested into a belief we tend to protect that belief in whatever way possible.
For example, if a particular thought makes us feel powerful and special, essentially an ego boost, we don't want that thought to be proven false because it would do serious damage to our ego.

In such cases, finding out the truth for real is not desirable if blind faith will make sure you remain in that feeling of being a hero.
Like, if people who believe in Jesus really had the opportunity to find out whether the Bible's account on Jesus is true or not, would they want to find out if it meant they risk finding they spent years believing a myth? Not to say the feeling of being stupid?

No one like to feel stupid. Especially those who fill their broken egos with beliefs that make them feel powerful. Thus they will not do anything that would risk loosing that self-image.
 
Last edited:

captfitch

Senior Member.
To be more accurate I think the outflow valves need to be examined, not any filters. I was under the impression that most airlines have removed the filters anyway. The planes I operate have them but there's no way for me to get to them. The outflow valves would have residue on them if anything is in the air since all the air int he plane passes through them on the way out. I recall stories about when smoking was still allowed, the outflow valves were virtually clogged shut with cigarette junk.

The other benefit about examining the valves is you could simply swab one with a q-tip or whatever and you wouldn't have to take the thing with you.

It could certainly be arranged to have two or three people watch the process until it is delivered to a lab or two of the participants choosing.
 

TomC

Member
Back to the marches, I'll be interested to see what, if any, media coverage this receives.

My guess is (unless hundreds turn up at some marches, unlikely I think) local papers at best, possibly local radio, and only if the organisers have been savvy enough to contact journalists beforehand (I suspect many won't have done)
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
The other benefit about examining the valves is you could simply swab one with a q-tip or whatever and you wouldn't have to take the thing with you.

It could certainly be arranged to have two or three people watch the process until it is delivered to a lab or two of the participants choosing.

The cabin walls would be contaminated if this was happening. So all they need do is get a window seat next time they go flying and take a few swabs of the walls. We do swabs of the cabin interior after a fumes event as part of the process to clear the aircraft back to flying.

Just as a side note.. I just finished a Bangkok-Sydney sector... On the climb out of Bangkok we climbed through some heavier than normal cirrus cloud at around 26,000 feet. Both the first officer and myself confirmed that we could hear the ice crystals hitting the windscreen as a high pitched sort of moaning sound. 17000 hours and I had never experienced that before. The noise stopped as we exited the cloud. I found it fascinating that I had never heard this before.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Can the ice crystals in a contrail or cirrus cloud accumulate on a facing surface?

I doubt it. For ice to build up it really needs to start as water. You get icing on planes when they fly though supercooled liquid clouds. Cirrus/Contrails are just a like a fine powder, not sticky.

http://www.tpub.com/weather3/6-7.htm
Cirroform Clouds. —Aircraft icing rarely occurs in cirrus clouds, although some cirrus do contain a small proportion of water droplets.Icing of moderate intensity, however, has been reported in dense cirrus and the anvil-tops ofcumulonimbus, where updrafts may maintain considerable water at rather low temperatures.
Content from External Source
 

captfitch

Senior Member.
Ok, so I'm still debating my clothing option. I feel like either I want to go in uniform and just openly answer questions/represent the alternative OR go in plain clothes and pass out some sort of flyer or something. I have a few things ready like the enroute charts over the dallas area that have lots of intersections on them as well as some pics.

Thoughts?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Ok, so I'm still debating my clothing option. I feel like either I want to go in uniform and just openly answer questions/represent the alternative OR go in plain clothes and pass out some sort of flyer or something. I have a few things ready like the enroute charts over the dallas area that have lots of intersections on them as well as some pics.

Thoughts?

It's a mixed bag. I'd like to see how they respond to an actual commercial pilot though. So I'd pick the uniform.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
I could go along dressed in my working "uniform".
But I don't think my plastic pocket protector is all that eye-catching, or indicative of Meteorologist.
OTOH, I am probably easily recognisable by those who are paying attention, given recent (unwanted) publicity.
 

Steve

Senior Member.
From my experience you should just wear plain clothes and pass out info sheets with web sites. Usually at these type of events the person with the most profound belief will be the 1st person on the scene setting things up for when the rest slowly show up. For this reason you will have better results talking to each individual as they first appear on the scene. Most don't know basic facts about contrail formation so your vast experience as a pilot will give due credit to what you are saying. You might want to bring some sort of official ID to prove your a pilot. The uniform might seem that you are there to mock them. If they hand out any of their stuff to the passing public, just hand out some of your info to the same people. Also use quarter sheets instead of full pages as hand outs because the general public don't like to receive full pages that they have to stuff into their pocket or purse. The hand outs should have mostly web site address that de-bunk the misinformation claims.
Be as kind and polite as you can even in the face of the most fanatical person. Finally, bring some water because the combination of heighten stress levels and the back and back verbal exchanges will dry you out very quickly.
 

captfitch

Senior Member.
I know, the mocking part is what I'm most worried about but it's clearly a real uniform and doesn't look like a costume. I just want to present a clear visual and informational juxtaposition. Not to stir the pot by any means. Also, I think I can "hide" behind the uniform to some extent. And thanks for all the technical tips.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
The uniform might seem that you are there to mock them.

Perhaps that is the problem. These people usually think in things like symbolism and semantics, which means they tend to anchor negative responses to things they find provoking. Visual and verbal cues so to speak.

I don't doubt that some people experience negative emotions when they see a pilot uniform, but that is because they hold prejudice against pilots as they've learned that pilots must be in on the conspiracy somehow.

This prejudice can only be countered if these people familiarize themselves with what a pilot is, in the same way as people holding prejudice against Muslims need to experience what a Muslim really is to realize how off their mental image of them have been. Of course there are different types of Muslims, most are very down-to-earth while some can be extreme and hostile.

Being a pilot is obviously not a faith but a profession, but the principle of facing prejudice remains the same. I would say these people need to familiarize with what a pilot really is and hear his or hers view on the subject, because what they have been told by the internet just isn't realistic. Obviously they have been told that most pilots know about the alleged reality of "chemtrails"but pilots keep quiet about it to hide "the truth".

I say bring the uniform ;)
 
Last edited:

A.G.

Senior Member.
Won't a uniform look a little too much like... "The Man"? I mean, like mrfintoil said, there's a lot of symbolism in this, and the believers often use pictures of riot police and other uniformed, masked forces. Also, they often picture themselves as "we, the ordinary people" while they can classify pilots, meteorologists, scientists, military etc as some kind of secretive elite, "others". I often have to point out in discussions that I'm just an ordinary guy, a father-of-three-kids with an interest in science, but also very concerned with environmental and climate issues and THAT is why I am also concerned with the chemtrails debate (because I think it is harmful to serious environmental work). The CT believers often don't realise that meteorologists are ordinary people, pilots (all kinds of pilots) are ordinary people, scientists are ordinary people etc. So - to bring this possibly semi-coherent ramble to a conclusion - might it not be alienating to appear in uniform, looking (to them) like a representative for "The Powers"? Might it not be better to appear as an ordinary human individual who also happens to be a pilot?
 

A.G.

Senior Member.
Well, yeah, it's probably more likely that they'll believe he's a pilot – but if they can't believe that anyway (by what he's saying, by seeing some sort of I.D/license, by wearing a spiffy enamel pin?) then what are the chances they'll believe what he says about contrails if he looks like he's been sent out by the authorities?

Heck, I don't know, I could be totally wrong. I can't for the life of me get my head around most of their reasoning.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
I think the point here would be to show that being a pilot means you are just as much human being as everybody else, and not necessarily a brainwashed shill/agent/space alien.

"Chemtrail" believers ofter cry about how pilots can have the conscience (or lack thereof) to "keep spraying" and don't care about it. This suggests to me that believers get the notion that pilots must be psychopaths with no regard for the health of themselves, their family, other people or the environment. That they are simply mindless robots of some sort.

Showing up as a pilot will hopefully demystify what pilots are, and hopefully help to explain to believers that just because a pilot won't find "chemtrails" reasonable doesn't mean the pilot is hiding something.
That it might just be that pilots find the arguments for "chemtrails" quite unconvincing.
 

Steve Funk

Senior Member.
The first draft of my sign reads: CHEMTRAILS = BUNK
Ask me why

If I can think of a less confrontational wording that gets the message across, I might change it.
 

Steve

Senior Member.
Once you start talking to them you won't even need a sign. Your giving their protest some credibility by counter-protesting with a sign as if this is a very important thing. The chemtrail movement is actually quit silly and the general public mostly ignores these people when they see them at their protests. Because your going to the Redding protest you'll have plenty of intense conversations with those special believers and it could get very heated. This action will actually draw a larger crowd of bystanders interested in the confrontation rather than what is being said.

I found the best way to help change their minds is to have a very quiet chat on the side with just one or two of the followers. Getting there early allows you easier non pressure one on one quiet conversation rather than full out shouting matches with a whole group.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I found the best way to help change their minds is to have a very quiet chat on the side with just one or two of the followers. Getting there early allows you easier non pressure one on one quiet conversation rather than full out shouting matches with a whole group.

I'd agree. One-on-one conversations have been much more productive for me. People tend to listen more when it's just you and them. It's hard to have a Socratic dialog with a crowd. Even if there are multiple people there, try to keep the focus with one person.
 

captfitch

Senior Member.
I didn't think about arriving early to avoid a large confrontation. No signs for me, just my presence. No flyers either. The only website I could responsibly reference is this one and I don't feel comfortable speaking on behalf of mick who knows all this stuff much better than I.
 
Top