deirdre
Senior Member.
because its a cloud now.
Nicole Shanahan, Advisor to RFK Jr, "Chemtrails" video 23rd February 2025
- Thread starter TEEJ
- Start date
deirdre
Senior Member.
i dont believe she understands what a chemtrail is either
If she thought it was just a contrail that expanded into a cloud, please explain the following:
- Why is she posting it with text "geoengineering"?
- Saying "Many of us know it's happening. We'd like more details, please.". What is happening? What is she asking for more details of?
- What "shit" needs to stop?
deirdre
Senior Member.
i dont care what she thinks or meant. i said she admitted it was a contrail that turned into a cloud.
because she did.
AmberRobot
Senior Member.
Without any other context (and I know nothing else about her) it would seem that she doesn't like the look of clouds caused by contrails on otherwise nice days. So air travel has to stop because it ruins her day.
If you have literally no ability to understand context or English in general. She did not "admit" it was a contrail that turned into a cloud. Quoting her again:
"That is NOT a contrail. That looked like it started as a contrail maybe". In context, she is making a distinction between this and what one would expect from a contrail. Again, the whole point of her post is that this is evidence of geoengineering, hence it's not a contrail from natural conditions.
Because there is no realistic way for you to simultaneously sanewash her post while also explaining the context of her calling it "geoengineering".
Yes, I suppose we have two explanations for the post
- She thinks it's a contrail that expanded into a cloud.
- This explanation requires the following assumptions and conclusions: "this shit has to stop" means "Air travel has to stop because clouds ruin sunny days". The reference to geoengineering is not related to the video. "Many of us know it's happening. We'd like more details, please.". The "it" is referring to airplanes, which yes, air travel is happening. She can get more details from the FAA, wikipedia, United Airlines, etc. She says "That's not a contrail" because it's now a cloud, even though contrails are clouds.
- She thinks the cloud is a result of geoengineering and not a contrail.
- This explanation requires the following assumptions and conclusions: The video, the captions, and her commentary are all related to geoengineering.
deirdre
Senior Member.
and "this", and every other contrail in her video, isnt what classic chemtrailists would expect from a contrail.
as i was mostly talking to Teej who started this thread, it is progress she is even calling it in any way shape or form a contrail and a cloud.
deirdre
Senior Member.
we know she believes in chemtrails because Teej later posted a comment from her where she says chemtrails.
but..technically geoengineering is weather modification and airplanes are a form weather modification. They arent a purposeful form, of course.
but that's why they are so studied by the Air Force and NASA etc. clouds during the day are technically good for climate change (block the sun), BUT plane contrails are a net negative for climate change because at night those persisting contrails trap the heat.
but that's neither here nor there really in regards to her post..im just telling you for your own sake.
Technically without Teej's later input and Jay Reynolds input on Dane Wingington, we could take her stand alone tweet to mean that maybe she thinks the government is trying to block the sun to combat climate change (geoengineering) and shes not happy about it because Dane told her they were full of chemicals falling on her head and they are ruining people's sunny days.
People do get upset about contrails even when they know they are contrails because in some places the skies are covered in contrails often enough to piss a person off. it would piss me off (luckily we dont get entire sky covered contrails here)
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
Exactly. She interviewed Dane Wigington two weeks ago. Even after 20 years his site carries no explanation of what a contrail is, the conditions in which they form or why they persist or not. He has generally become the High Priest of chemtrails, and will never confuse the issue by telling his people anything about contrails.
I recently checked his site several times and he has become more adamant that contrails are a myth and a lie. So she got nothing from him and will need to get there on her own.
I also recently found that he has threatened lawsuits to at least three chemtrail believers who criticised him. If you check his site you realize that everything is all about Dane. He used to at least mention fellow believers but over time he has isolated himself more and more. He recently appeared in front of his County board and several locals spoke out against him, saying they were tired of him wasting people's time and energy. Over time, it seems to me, what might have been moderating influences have gone away. But like the very good salesman he is, he is always prospecting and it seems like there is a never ending source of newbies. Very few publicly out him even when they become disillusioned and back off.
It is going to take Shanahan showing some real personal integrity to out him when she realizes she has been hoodwinked. Even just an admission she was wrong will be humbling.
She has plenty of resources and could self fund any sort of study she wants, pay for information, get in touch with anybody. This will actually be a good test of what she is really made of, and the same for RFK Jr who have both had contact with Dane. I don't think that he can hold any sway over her like he has for others.
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
Sorry if I didn't do it right.
I cant post any more text than that on my brand new X account. That was my very first "tweet", ever.
And I can't make an aeronautical chart any simpler than that. Flightradar deosn't show airways, which was my intended point.
Most people go to Skyvector and just see the VFR chart which is WAY more "scary". Some information is complicated and most people are dumb and lazy, which is why they are easy prey for charlatans.
Attachments
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
For some, yes. She was a VP candidate. She may already be under some peer pressure or at least some influence. Chemmies have always tried to influence those they perceive to have bigger voices.
They had Chuck Norris, Waylon Jennings, Prince and quite a few others. Norris was a disappointment to all he just clammed up eventually and spends all his time now with his wife endorsing stupid vitamin commercials on youtube. That probably pays more than teaming up with Dane Wigington!
It would be great if they started a feud and the whole thing blows up and she calls their bluff in a big stinker.
FatPhil
Senior Member.
I don't. That should have been clear from the tenor of my post, but it's not my views that are under scrutiny here. The question was raised as what you wrote only makes sense if you do believe that.
However, yes, I was being pedantic about your misapplication of that label. You framed it as a statement of fact. It was false. It needed correcting, for, as it stood, it was bunk; that's what we stand against here.
FatPhil
Senior Member.
Mendel
Senior Member.
It is also true that contrails contribute to the greenhouse effect.
Article: To reduce jet fuel consumption, modern aircraft are designed to fly at higher altitudes where the air is thinner with less aerodynamic drag, compared to older commercial aircraft, which usually fly at slightly lower altitudes (around 35,000ft/11km).
This means these higher-flying aircraft create less carbon emissions per passenger. However, it also means they create contrails that take longer to dissipate – creating a warming effect for longer and a complicated trade-off for the aviation industry.
[...]
Despite being smaller and using less fuel, private jets create similar contrails to much larger commercial aircraft, the analysis found, which surprised the researchers.
Private jets fly higher than other planes, more than 40,000 feet above earth where there is less air traffic. However, like modern commercial aircraft creating more contrails compared to lower-flying older commercial aircraft, the high altitudes flown by private jets means they create outsized contrails.
Article: The current best-estimate of the global annual mean radiative forcing (RF) attributable to contrail cirrus is thought to be 3 times larger than the RF from aviation's cumulative CO2 emissions.
Around 14 % of all flights in 2019 formed a contrail with a net warming effect, yet only 2 % of all flights caused 80 % of the annual contrail energy forcing. The spatiotemporal patterns of the most strongly warming and cooling contrail segments can be attributed to flight scheduling, engine particle number emissions, tropopause height, and background radiation fields.
This suggests that legal restrictions on a small number of contrail-forming flights could mitigate much of the climate-changing ("geoengineering") impact of contrails.
Ms. Shanahan seems well positioned to make that happen, if she wanted to.
deirdre
Senior Member.
at the very least she might stop taking private jets if she knew that information. Thats the first time i've heard about private jets myself.
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
Reportedly she is a wealthy 1%er, and looking on the bright side I expect she could be of great help bringing our perspective to a wider audience. If we try perhaps that can happen, if we don't she will remain under the influence of chemtrail liars.
I have tried to invited her to become a Metabunk member, but my connection is slow today, it's saved to draft and I'll try again later. But I encourage everyone here to try an engagement like this:
deirdre
Senior Member.
contrails are not that complicated.
yes it gets a bit more complicated if you trying to measure them to determine effects on weather.. but as far as how and why contrails form and linger or dont linger-and spread-, there are science channels for kids on youtube with simple graphics.
then maybe you should edit your posts where you call vitamins stupid, and accuse her friends (and maybe herself) as being dumb and lazy.
(inviting her here is the worst thing you can do. maybe just link her to contrailscience.com IF you invite her here she will be attacked and gangpiled and it wont be a pleasant experience for her)
Ann K
Senior Member.
Anecdotally, the sky was exceptionally clear, a seldom-seen deep blue here in the Cleveland, Ohio area ... on September 12 and 13, 2001, the days following the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, when all air traffic was grounded.
This provided an unscheduled experiment on the relationship between air traffic and climate:
https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/...ge-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/External Quote:
Last edited:
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
Well, we disagree. She doesn't even have to engage, just exposure to the information is a powerful antidote.
At this point she probably only has one side of the story. Most people are lazy, myself included. I force myself to work because I know it's good for me. If the subject of contrails was not complicated there wouldn't be scientists studying them as a career and continuously writing new papers. Sure you can dumb it down to a childish level but my point was that lazy people take an easy route and go for whatever some guy on the internet says after he enters their own biases.
Her recent experience has been a revelation about the political reality where a powerful Democratic Party sought to destroy her candidacy. She's associated with RFKJr and he has his own level of suspicion believing his father was killed in a conspiracy. So she is already in an us/them state of mind which Dane has probably been exploiting. I expect that whichever way she goes she will be criticized. If she continues as a chemtrail believer she just opens another door for criticism. If she speaks against chemtrail belief she gets it from the other side. The easy way will be the lazy way, to just hush up like most people do when they realize they were gullible enough to fall for bunk. That is actually a great loss I hope doesn't happen.
Dierdre maybe you can point her towards contrailscience.com, that would be proactive.
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
I interviewed WWII pilots on this 26 years ago:
"We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. " - Willard Reese- 457th Bomb Group
https://goodsky.homestead.com/files/deception5.html
Ann K
Senior Member.
You sure you want his input, if you're looking for factual information?
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/rfk-jr-chemtrails/External Quote:
deirdre
Senior Member.
i think contrail science is better. it is an article format so she doesnt have to slog through discussion threads. i'm guessing the comment section on contrail science might have some impoliteness, but you can read the articles without reading the comment sections.
the older contrail threads were polite, but if she comes here she is likely to click threads on the home page. (and the contrail forum is kinda huge, so she'd need guidance)
i was going to but all her places i could reply had hundreds and sometimes thousands of responses already..so i dont believe she actually reads them all.
deirdre
Senior Member.
Jay isnt looking for factual information. He knows all the factual information. MB used to try to politely engage people, in an attempt to tamp down the spread of misinformation. We didnt try to shut people up or shame them. (because that tactic does not work)
Ann K
Senior Member.
I was thinking of it less as a site for people to get good information, and more as a site where people are permitted to post misinformation. But you're right, when misinformation is presented, we are a good place to find people who will correct it.
deirdre
Senior Member.
well there were stricter posting guidelines in the past too, especially for OPs. and OPs were updated, so readers didnt have to slog through 25 pages to find 4 interesting tidbits.
Lackadaisical OPs and thread focus do encourage more engagement, basically at this point despite "alternative" opinions being hidden or driven away from MB.. it's just now a crowd sourcing tool for twitter users to use for their debunks on twitter or youtube (as twitter and youtube get more eyes).
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
The pinned threads are really good!
TEEJ
Senior Member.
Nicole clearly is confused about contrails. She agreed with the following post. In regard to contrails it states "Water vapor does not linger disperse and whiteout the entire sky."
Source: https://x.com/plantparadise7/status/1882831034401828963
Thank you for the info! This firmly establishes the point I was arguing above. I.e., she does not think the video she posted shows a contrail that turned into a cloud. She thinks it is a chemtrail NOT the result of a contrail, as I have been arguing with @deirdre all along.
AmberRobot
Senior Member.
I don't know who this Jonny Paradise is or what expertise he has on atmospheric physics, but this looks just like a flat earth meme. We have no reason to believe that these photographs are related to each other or just separate photos of various sky conditions, put together in order to create an impression that may be incorrect.
deirdre
Senior Member.
i think you mean 'arguing about' the point you are still missing 'all along'.
Ann K
Senior Member.
Why on earth would she think that? I don't think she comprehends clouds any more than she does contrails. She is in a busy place for air traffic, so she should have had plenty of chances to observe contrails spreading. Does she think there is a sudden change taking place, or is she calling every contrail a "chemtrail"?
Here's a picture of Florida and the nearby states showing a general view of the amount of air traffic. Fun observation: see where the different masses of air meet - I've marked an exceptionally clear place out over the Atlantic - and contrails are visible in a more moist/cooler air, but not in the dry air to the north of the red line. Perhaps things like that would make sense to her, but of course you'd have to persuade her to listen to that explanation.
Contrails form in exactly the same places clouds form, and for the same reasons,https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/...ge-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/
deirdre
Senior Member.
maybe shes thinking of a tea kettle when she hears "water vapor". or evaporation (which is invisible).
most people don't even notice contrails. heck i rarely notice them anymore now that MB is talking about them everyday.
My mom was fascinated with contrails after i told her about the chemtrail theory. obviously she had "seen" contrails before but she only started to really LOOK at them after i was telling her about the theory and the debunks etc.
that picture will make her feel better
what makes you think the air north of that red line is dry?
FatPhil
Senior Member.
https://journaljgeesi.com/index.php/JGEESI/article/view/16
"source of causality leading to" rather than "cause of" says "try hards".
"fire ignition by lightening" says they and their reviewers aren't bright enough.
-- https://journaljgeesi.com/index.php/JGEESI/publication-chargeExternal Quote:
says "pay to play", possibly predatory, journal.
Now I'm not saying they are a predatory journal, of course. but this says it's published by a predatory publisher:
from:
Source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BHM4aJljhbOAzSpkX1kXDUEvy6vxREZu5WJaDH6M1Vk/edit?gid=0#gid=0
via: https://www.predatoryjournals.org/the-list/publishers
also at: https://beallslist.net/
FatPhil
Senior Member.
Are you happy with water vapour saturation being a relative measurement which depends on air pressure and temperature? From that, it follows that a weather front can separate regions of air with different temperatures/pressures, but the same water vapour concentrations, such that on one side (with temperature below the dew point) the saturation is >100%, and on the other side (with temperature above the dew point) it's <100%? Because if you're happy with those two things, Ann seems to have found an example. Note, specifically, that the water vapour concentrations in ppm can be the same, but on the non-saturated side it's considered "dry", and the saturated side, it's not.that picture will make her feel better
If, and I'm not saying it is, your objection would be that the spotted cloud layer (possibly altocumulus?) in the same region shows no such abrupt change, that's because air at different altitudes can be quite different from each other, there can be homogeneity at one altitude, but not at others.
Mendel
Senior Member.
if H2O can't disperse like that, why would other molecules be able to?
first of all, I can easily imagine air being turbulent enough to mix things around pretty well (on some days).
but if I accepted (against the evidence of these pictures) that air can't do it, then I wouldn't accept that the air can do it to other chemicals, either.
What's so special about "chemtrails" that they can do what contrails can't??
This feels like magical thinking to me.
Jay Reynolds
Senior Member.
Shanahan uses the term "water vapor" but doesn't realize that water vapor is an invisible gas. This tells me there is a lack of basic knowledge.
She probably doesn't realize that the visible contrail is frozen condensation in ice form, or all the rest of the contrail formation and development process including crystal growth by accretion of mass from pre-existing moisture in the air and persistence as a function of ice supersaturated air, which is part of what Ann is pointing out in her satellite image. Ann is correct that Shanahan doesn't understand anything about contrails, and what she doesn't understand she has misinterpreted because of ignorance and blindly following a narrative by siloed people.
All of this comes after she has had contact and done an interview with Dane Wigington. For Dane's part, he avoids all conversation about contrail processes. I checked many times over decades and there is absolutely zero mention of ordinary contrail processes on his site. He has created a void of information for his followers because he doesn't want them exposed to information which can unravel his theme. He makes a blanket statement that contrails are "a lie" and a "myth". He even moved the historic goalposts by asserting that contrails in WWII photos are evidence of geoengineering resulting in his claim that geoengineering was taking place for over 70 years.
To fully understand contrails requires understanding some basic meteorology, some physics, some chemistry, and the full definitions of technical words in those sciences. It also requires openness to being wrong and removal of biases, going against peer pressure/herd mentality, and willingness to change a pre-existing belief. Lastly, it requires effort.
She probably doesn't realize that the visible contrail is frozen condensation in ice form, or all the rest of the contrail formation and development process including crystal growth by accretion of mass from pre-existing moisture in the air and persistence as a function of ice supersaturated air, which is part of what Ann is pointing out in her satellite image. Ann is correct that Shanahan doesn't understand anything about contrails, and what she doesn't understand she has misinterpreted because of ignorance and blindly following a narrative by siloed people.
All of this comes after she has had contact and done an interview with Dane Wigington. For Dane's part, he avoids all conversation about contrail processes. I checked many times over decades and there is absolutely zero mention of ordinary contrail processes on his site. He has created a void of information for his followers because he doesn't want them exposed to information which can unravel his theme. He makes a blanket statement that contrails are "a lie" and a "myth". He even moved the historic goalposts by asserting that contrails in WWII photos are evidence of geoengineering resulting in his claim that geoengineering was taking place for over 70 years.
To fully understand contrails requires understanding some basic meteorology, some physics, some chemistry, and the full definitions of technical words in those sciences. It also requires openness to being wrong and removal of biases, going against peer pressure/herd mentality, and willingness to change a pre-existing belief. Lastly, it requires effort.
deirdre
Senior Member.
my "objection"-if that's what we're calling it- is that wouldn't the dark areas indicate "dry" more than the area Ann is calling dry? i see cloud cover in ann's area.
are those contrails near anns red line? or are those those stripey clouds at a different altitude? do planes even fly there?
Trending content
-
-
-
Thread 'Issues with Dalia Bergoin's presentation at Contact in the Desert'- Charlie Wiser
Replies: 13 -
-