Max Bliss inadvertently debunks most chemtrail theories

TWCobra

Senior Member.
Max Bliss, in an attempt to blame aluminium as the source of illnesses resulting from cabin fume exposures has unearthed a 2004 scientific study on the chemicals found in aircraft cabins and their toxic effect.
image.jpg


The study was done by the Civil Aviation Authority (UK) and can be downloaded here.

The study is a comprehensive analysis of aircraft air conditioning ducts for toxic chemicals, the sort of study that chemtrail activists have been agitating for years for. It involved analysis of three air conditioning ducts, one new and two used ones that had amassed over 51000 hours of flying time between them.

According to the report, some aluminium was found amongst other chemicals. The levels found were attributed as follows;

  1. The inner surface of ducts 2 and 3 gave large peaks for aluminium and silicon and smaller peaks for sulphur, phosphorus, iron, potassium, titanium, chromium and magnesium in addition to the carbon, chlorine, calcium and copper found in duct 1. The speciation of these additional elements is unknown but they are likely to exist as the native element or non-volatile chemical compounds. All of these elements are present in both new and used aviation lubricants as detailed in reference [4]. They are also found in ambient air. The higher concentration of these elements in the lining of used ducts than in oil indicates either a concentration on the duct lining over a period of time or an additional source of contamination. The detailed results from the EM are detailed in Appendix A paragraph 2.

    This supports the thesis of synthetic lubricating oil as the source of exposed duct contamination.
    Content from External Source
    While the levels of aluminium are explained, what is worthy of comment is the complete ABSENCE of any barium, strontium or aluminium oxide.

    Also the aluminium present is not listed by the report as a toxic chemical or even an irritant.

    image.jpg
    The complete absence of "chemtrail" chemicals; aluminium oxide, barium and strontium in aircraft ducts that have a combined flight time of over 51,000 hours is inexplicable to those who believe that these chemicals are being routinely sprayed into the atmosphere.

    The fact that it is one of the most strident supporters of the theory who has inadvertently blown it out of the water, is irony indeed.
 
Last edited:

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Perhaps this thread should be renamed so its relevance is more obvious? Like, 'study disproves claimed chemtrail ingredients'?
 

Melbury's Brick

Senior Member.
Won't make a fart of a difference to him. He's on a rollercoaster ride of his own percieved fame/infamy (can Brits please avoid "Carry On" gags!). A little thing like being hopelessly wrong and accidentally confirming it ain't gonna bother
him.
 

Peter

Active Member
This would indeed be damning information to the Chemtrail movement. Sadly, the chemtrail movement doesn't operate on factual information (for the most part). Most of the people who populate it can't tell the difference between a boeing 747 and a learjet, know nothing of meteorology (thinking that conditions on the ground are the same as 7 miles up there, for instance), and don't seem to be very interested to learn about these things either.

So I don't think this is going to make much of splash. Instead they'll probably jump on the bit that says 'Aluminium' and crow victory.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
complete ABSENCE of ... aluminium oxide
That's incorrect. Note that the study said:
The speciation of these additional elements is unknown but they are likely to exist as the native element or non-volatile chemical compounds
Content from External Source
So it could have been aluminum oxide.
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
it probably was. They mentioned the spikes in Aluminium are elements that are in ambient air, and in ambient air it is FAR more likely to be Aluminium Oxide than elemental aluminium.

It does NOT appear in the list of substances considered to be toxic or even irritants.
It does not suggest that the LEVELS of ALuminium or Silicon are SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER than they would have been in the surrounding air.
If a plane had flown through trails composed of nothing but Alumiunium Oxide on a regular basis, you would expect to see some very significant build up of this in the air ducts, wouldn't you?
 
Top