"Non-Persistent" and "Non-Visible Chemtrails"

MikeG

Senior Member.
A friend forwarded this link to Russ Tanner’s Global Skywatch.

He is now claiming that chemtrails are being altered to “short non-persistent plumes to fool the public.”


http://globalskywatch.com/stories/m...l-information/plumes-change.html#.VbpXMCSar-b


But he doesn’t stop there.


Those spraying chemtrails would like nothing more than for you to believe that short, non-persistent plumes coming out of jets are harmless contrails.


If they convince you of this, then, when upgrades in equipment allow them to spray chemtrails which produce only short, non-persistent plumes, you will be convinced that they are perfectly harmless.


These upgrades in equipment are already occurring. Non-persistent chemtrails are now appearing all over the world.


But that's not the end of the story. Now, people in many areas are reporting no visible chemtrails at all. Have they gone away? No. They have only gone high-altitude.


I have personally witnessed chemtrails change from:


(1) Persistent chemtrails, to

(2) Non-persistent chemtrails, to

(3) Non-visible chemtrails (high-altitude chemtrails not visible from the ground),


and because I have a sensitive sense of smell and taste, I have an important story to tell.


This article covers a lot of ground. I hope it helps raise awareness about the new tactics used to hide chemtrails from the public.
Content from External Source
This reminds me somewhat of Dane Wigington’s claim that there is no more “virtually no natural weather” occurring because of geoengineering.

http://chemtrailsplanet.net/2014/02...ails-climate-engineering-and-weather-warfare/

What Tanner has done, at least from what I can see, is remove the need for any debate over distinctions between contrails and chemtrails. Essentially, everything in the sky, no matter what form it takes, is a chemtrail, including “personally witnessed” invisible chemtrails.

By this, I think he means the chemtrails that he can smell within 20 minutes of spraying, although how the timeline works with "non-visible" chemtrails is a little sketchy.

It seems we are now reducing the discourse to our sense of smell rather than sight.
 

Pigeonkak

Member
A friend forwarded this link to Russ Tanner’s Global Skywatch.

He is now claiming that chemtrails are being altered to “short non-persistent plumes to fool the public.”


http://globalskywatch.com/stories/m...l-information/plumes-change.html#.VbpXMCSar-b


But he doesn’t stop there.


Those spraying chemtrails would like nothing more than for you to believe that short, non-persistent plumes coming out of jets are harmless contrails.


If they convince you of this, then, when upgrades in equipment allow them to spray chemtrails which produce only short, non-persistent plumes, you will be convinced that they are perfectly harmless.


These upgrades in equipment are already occurring. Non-persistent chemtrails are now appearing all over the world.


But that's not the end of the story. Now, people in many areas are reporting no visible chemtrails at all. Have they gone away? No. They have only gone high-altitude.


I have personally witnessed chemtrails change from:


(1) Persistent chemtrails, to

(2) Non-persistent chemtrails, to

(3) Non-visible chemtrails (high-altitude chemtrails not visible from the ground),


and because I have a sensitive sense of smell and taste, I have an important story to tell.


This article covers a lot of ground. I hope it helps raise awareness about the new tactics used to hide chemtrails from the public.
Content from External Source
This reminds me somewhat of Dane Wigington’s claim that there is no more “virtually no natural weather” occurring because of geoengineering.

http://chemtrailsplanet.net/2014/02...ails-climate-engineering-and-weather-warfare/

What Tanner has done, at least from what I can see, is remove the need for any debate over distinctions between contrails and chemtrails. Essentially, everything in the sky, no matter what form it takes, is a chemtrail, including “personally witnessed” invisible chemtrails.

By this, I think he means the chemtrails that he can smell within 20 minutes of spraying, although how the timeline works with "non-visible" chemtrails is a little sketchy.

It seems we are now reducing the discourse to our sense of smell rather than sight.

Next? Chemtrails designed to look like Cumulonimbus.

And the utterly ridiculous contradiction in the statement of "personally witnessed invisible chemtrails"? Shaking my head vigorously!!!
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Here, too:
upload_2015-7-30_23-44-43.png

So when you see nothing in the sky, that's the most dangerous because then there are invisible chemtrails!!!
 

MikeG

Senior Member.
Here, too:
upload_2015-7-30_23-44-43.png

So when you see nothing in the sky, that's the most dangerous because then there are invisible chemtrails!!!

Just remarkable. The absence of evidence as evidence.

It some respects, it is similar to a "super conspiracy" in which organizations like the Illuminati are so secret, the very absence of evidence of their work clearly demonstrates their influence.

Circular logic at its best.
 

keefe

Active Member
And you can check on flightradar24 you will be able to see which planes are leaving the invisible trails ... which might make you wonder, if they can leave invisible trails why do they still leave the visible ones?
 

Bruno D.

Senior Member.
I am simply speechless.

I hope this somehow drives some people away from him. It will all turn to "faith on Russ' nose" and nothing else.
 

MikeG

Senior Member.
I am simply speechless.

I hope this somehow drives some people away from him. It will all turn to "faith on Russ' nose" and nothing else.

I am not sure, but that may be the point. If followers put "faith in Russ' nose," the movement will be more dependent on him and not other types of observable data, even the types normally accepted by chemtrail believers.

Russ Tanner then becomes an indispensable part of his particular universe. I see that same type of centralized authority in Dane Wigington.

I increasingly believe that what drives the CT community is this type of faith rather than facts. Other threads have discussed this idea.


https://www.metabunk.org/the-psychology-of-the-ct-believers.t841/page-9#post-154838

https://www.metabunk.org/debunking-...e-the-bunk-motivated-reason.t3249/#post-93825

https://www.metabunk.org/chemtrails-and-other-conspiracy-theories-i-dont-believe.t180/#post-873
 

Bruno D.

Senior Member.
I am not sure, but that may be the point. If followers put "faith in Russ' nose," the movement will be more dependent on him and not other types of observable data, even the types normally accepted by chemtrail believers.

Russ Tanner then becomes an indispensable part of his particular universe. I see that same type of centralized authority in Dane Wigington.

I increasingly believe that what drives the CT community is this type of faith rather than facts. Other threads have discussed this idea.


https://www.metabunk.org/the-psychology-of-the-ct-believers.t841/page-9#post-154838

https://www.metabunk.org/debunking-...e-the-bunk-motivated-reason.t3249/#post-93825

https://www.metabunk.org/chemtrails-and-other-conspiracy-theories-i-dont-believe.t180/#post-873


I think @Mick West should add a "sad face" together with the "funny face". I agree with you, but this is just sad.
 

Logique

New Member
What would even be the point of this? They've already "fooled" the majority, and even the people who aren't "fooled" can't really do anything about them, visible or no.

Do these actually people duck and cover whenever they see something in the sky, and think they're trying to lull them into a false sense of security, or something?

Or did they all adopt the method of that one lady who thought spraying vinegar into the air made them go away and think they're trying to prevent that? o_O
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
If spraying chemicals was indeed taken further to be invisible - what to do with persistent contrails?
They won't go away ...

And if they are still deemed to be evil - what's the use of invisible spraying? It can't be secrecy as long as persistent trails are still around.
Logical short circuit here.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
The believers have always noted this evidence.

From: Contrail Frequency Over the USA From Surface Observations

contrail frequency.jpg

For example, in the summer of 2001 when they noticed the frequency decline Dr. Patrick Minnis of NASA (posting as CANEX) wrote to them:


ABC123
Senior Member of the "Awake"

Central-Coastal CA, USA
46 posts, May 2001

posted 06-13-2001 07:58 PM ...So strange that for the past 3 days or so I have not seen ANY spraying. I have been relishing in beautiful blue skies and "clean" air. It just seams VERY weird to me that it suddenly is "quiet on the western front" as they say. I am in Central California.


canex
Senior Member
USA
164 posts, Oct 2000

posted 06-13-2001 08:53 PM It is the summertime lull beginning. July and August are weak months for contrails.


Lulu
ice behaving badly
right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000

posted 06-13-2001 10:08 PM Long time no read Mr. Canex. How's things at the Research Center? In case you didn't realize this is a chemtrail forum. If you believe the mess in the skies is from contrails then perhaps the Hoax board is where you should be. http://www.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?&user=Earthboundmisfit
Content from External Source
This long term observation should be a clue to them that weather causes what they fear, not the other way around.
Instead of incorporating the observation to modify their hypothesis, they conform the observation to fit the hypothesis.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Remember two years ago when G. Edward Griffin stepped forward and told Dane Wigington that his research found that "chemtrails" came not from unidentifiable USAF tankers but from identifiable commercial jets? Griffin made the comment after he began to receive comments from believers who were advocating violence. If Griffin got emails like that I'm sure Wigington has too, and such comments have appeared on his FB and GEW pages already.

G Edward Griffin 1.jpg




G Edward Griffin.jpg

Subsequently, Griffin was attacked by Dane Wigington about a hypothesis that the commercial planes were making "chemtrails" because of previously unseen planes which sprayed something else causing the commercial planes to make visible trails......


The “Seeder Planes”

Perhaps the most implausible of Mr Griffin’s conclusions are the “seeder planes”. His theory suggests that the jets we see spraying, are not really spraying, but rather, there are not-so-visible “seeder planes” that are actually doing the spraying. This somehow makes it look like jets are spraying (the ones we see with our own eyes) when they are in fact not spraying, they are just passing through the spray laid down by the “seeder planes ” that we did not see spraying.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/re-griffins-dont-blame-the-pilots-correcting-the-record-again/
Content from External Source
So, both Griffin's hypothesis and that of Tanner/Wigington incorporate non-visible "spraying" ideas yet Wiginton declared the idea "the most implausible" conclusion he could make.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
What would even be the point of this? They've already "fooled" the majority, and even the people who aren't "fooled" can't really do anything about them, visible or no.

Do these actually people duck and cover whenever they see something in the sky, and think they're trying to lull them into a false sense of security, or something?

Or did they all adopt the method of that one lady who thought spraying vinegar into the air made them go away and think they're trying to prevent that? o_O


They do all kinds of evasive maneuvers. They keep their kids in the house. THey avoid going outside.

And I'd add that MANY Of the believe in these "invisible trails" now. The think there is a "new formula". So I do not count on this driving many people away from Dane.

And regarding Griffin's "hypothesis", there are many who believe that one plane sprays something, and the next plane "activates" it. Or some kind of "HAARP pulse" activates it.

There is an ever evolving, ever morphing aspect of the chemtrail hoax. Whatever it is: it's got something to do with chemtrails.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
inv5.PNG inv4.PNG inv3.PNG inv2.PNG inv1.PNG

I think you're joking? I've seen this postulated also.
I wasn't exactly joking. I read about "invisible" planes before on CT sites and combined them with "invisible" trails. But it looks like conspiratorial minds have already made this connection :cool:
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Dane says something is always visible, even if it's just "obscurity" or "silvery white skies":
upload_2015-8-2_14-2-51.png
 

MikeG

Senior Member.
Remember two years ago when G. Edward Griffin stepped forward and told Dane Wigington that his research found that "chemtrails" came not from unidentifiable USAF tankers but from identifiable commercial jets? Griffin made the comment after he began to receive comments from believers who were advocating violence. If Griffin got emails like that I'm sure Wigington has too, and such comments have appeared on his FB and GEW pages already.

G Edward Griffin 1.jpg




G Edward Griffin.jpg

Subsequently, Griffin was attacked by Dane Wigington about a hypothesis that the commercial planes were making "chemtrails" because of previously unseen planes which sprayed something else causing the commercial planes to make visible trails......


The “Seeder Planes”

Perhaps the most implausible of Mr Griffin’s conclusions are the “seeder planes”. His theory suggests that the jets we see spraying, are not really spraying, but rather, there are not-so-visible “seeder planes” that are actually doing the spraying. This somehow makes it look like jets are spraying (the ones we see with our own eyes) when they are in fact not spraying, they are just passing through the spray laid down by the “seeder planes ” that we did not see spraying.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/re-griffins-dont-blame-the-pilots-correcting-the-record-again/
Content from External Source
So, both Griffin's hypothesis and that of Tanner/Wigington incorporate non-visible "spraying" ideas yet Wiginton declared the idea "the most implausible" conclusion he could make.

The internal debates that break out among chemtrail leaders is interesting. It might be worth a separate thread.
 

keefe

Active Member
Remember two years ago when G. Edward Griffin stepped forward and told Dane Wigington that his research found that "chemtrails" came not from unidentifiable USAF tankers but from identifiable commercial jets? Griffin made the comment after he began to receive comments from believers who were advocating violence. If Griffin got emails like that I'm sure Wigington has too, and such comments have appeared on his FB and GEW pages already.

G Edward Griffin 1.jpg




G Edward Griffin.jpg

Subsequently, Griffin was attacked by Dane Wigington about a hypothesis that the commercial planes were making "chemtrails" because of previously unseen planes which sprayed something else causing the commercial planes to make visible trails......


The “Seeder Planes”

Perhaps the most implausible of Mr Griffin’s conclusions are the “seeder planes”. His theory suggests that the jets we see spraying, are not really spraying, but rather, there are not-so-visible “seeder planes” that are actually doing the spraying. This somehow makes it look like jets are spraying (the ones we see with our own eyes) when they are in fact not spraying, they are just passing through the spray laid down by the “seeder planes ” that we did not see spraying.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/re-griffins-dont-blame-the-pilots-correcting-the-record-again/
Content from External Source
So, both Griffin's hypothesis and that of Tanner/Wigington incorporate non-visible "spraying" ideas yet Wiginton declared the idea "the most implausible" conclusion he could make.

I think that idea is quite a good one for ct theory - it does away with the need for a huge conspiracy involving all pilots, plus some engineers and ground staff in every airport and every airline, and secret tanks in all commercial airliners ... I don't know why Dane doesn't like it, but if you try pointing out to him that ct'ers like this fellow are identifying the planes as "100% commercial flights from all airlines" he doesn't allow it past moderation
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
I don't know why Dane doesn't like it, but if you try pointing out to him that ct'ers like this fellow are identifying the planes as "100% commercial flights from all airlines" he doesn't allow it past moderation

Like you said, it does away with a big conspiracy theory. He has always maintained that USAF tankers are responsible and to admit fallibility diminishes his power.

https://www.metabunk.org/14-years-of-chemtrails-comments-and-suggestions.t100/

He has recently tried to incorporate and accept that ordinary flights are involved but maintains that some system is installed on commercial planes which is operated covertly. He doesn't address the fact that pilots know when their airplane's weight and balance conditions changes during flight, and that they can often see:
- when they make contrails by the shadow
-when other planes make contrails
-pilots inspect equipment installed on their airplanes
-material would be loaded on tarmac in full public view
-airplanes are at any point i time and space inspected unannounced by mechanics and random officials
-commercial flights don't fly high enough to disperse material for effective SRM deployment

There is also personal liability involved if someone begins to accuse a corporation of illegal activity. Dane Wigington has assumed a higher profile leadership position than others where he knows he bears some responsibility for what he says. Once he crosses a line of making such an accusation he makes himself liable for those statements in real life against an entity which could easily show his claim is meritless. I think that so long as he stays away from that line and his accusations are vague he believes he can escape responsibility yet remain in the game instead of being shown wrong and game over.
 

Spectrar Ghost

Senior Member.
Smell is so emotionally linked it wouldn't surprise me if certain smells caused tanner to notice contrails or vice versa. Scent is by far the most subconsciously active of the five traditional senses.
 
Top