what a little wasp nest
This from Jay:
What I am wondering is what will he do about it?
He set himself up as the victim, we flogged him a bit, he came back for more, got flogged again.
He never answered whether, or not, he was really interested in identifying the planes he sees.
But what does he intend to do besides come here and play victim/
If he just wanted to complain about his Met office, maybe he should complain to the source.
In fact, I'd bet he has never complained to them yet, or even mentioned it to them
as he did here.
If you did, show us the proof!
I doubt that he even felt it was worthwhile.
Except as part of the long laundry list which included some ridiculous complaint
about NASA being staffed by ex-nazis disinformationalists,
who would be about 90 years old,
That's stretching the goal posts, I think.........
The ramblings of a madman, you might think...but look, he says:
In fact, I'd bet he has never complained to them yet, or even mentioned it to them as he did here. ....Actually, I've written to them twice and received no reply.
On Nasa Nazis:
Quote: However, The Birmingham News reported that the space center's director, James Thompson, vowed to make the von Braun celebration an annual event and urged current NASA employees to ''rub elbows with these old guys--maybe some of their experience will rub off on us."
Presumably, that "experience" will exclude their wartime activities. Von Braun's own admissions in U.S. Army records show that the man NASA touts as a hero was an S.S. major who frequently visited the underground rocket factory where a black American flyer and 25,000 other prisoners from the concentration camp Dora died. During one visit, according to documents shown on CNN, von Braun attended a meeting that discussed rounding up citizens off the streets of France to be brought to Dora.
When people learn that I cover stories on Nazis, they often ask if I know of groups supporting "nests" of Nazis in America, than react with surprise when my immediate answer is, "Yes, the Federal government." NASA should clean up this nest--soon. End quote.
That puts you somewhere to the right of CNN - some feat that!
Oh man - it's all in the past - we all make mistakes - forget it - poor Nazis, hounded at every turn - except in the US, where they're given top jobs. And that appears to be just fine with you guys - apologists for Nazis, how nice. I wonder why Nasa don't have a hall of fame on their website? I think that would be a grand idea. For some reason they don't mention it.
Then this from Stupid:
Stupid
Is a lack of gov't response to any subject, proof that they're hiding it ?
If that's the case, everything they do not address, is suspect.
...and can apply to anything from "chemtrails".....to the tooth fairy.
They rarely speak of tooth fairies.
Well spotted, Stupid. Your argument might work - if it made any sense. If the tooth fairy was flying around for three days straight, creating solid cloud cover over one of the world's largest cities - and the professors from the academy of tooth fairy studies never made reference to the phenomenon, despite it being pointed out to them by many people and it being as obvious as an elephant in the room, then it would be a little suspect - don't you think? By your brilliant logic, the government is also lacking a response to Snow White's kidnap by seven exceptionally small men.
Those whose job it is to understand and predict the weather should not ignore phenomena that are an increasingly big influence on exactly that. That would be unscientific. It is also true to say that the clouds made by aircraft are cirrus-like, but distinctions can be made and these man-made clouds should have a new nomenclature - have you seen them? Don't you think that's right?
And then there's Mick:
Mick
I think Lee feels like he understands how the world works, and that he's cracked through the matrix, and that all us debunkers are either useful idiots, or shills. He wants to either demonstrate the former, or expose the latter.
Either way, he's not got a lot to go on. The Met Office does not put contrails in their weather forecast is not exactly sterling evidence of anything - unless you are already convinced the Met Office is a propaganda arm of the PTB, in which case it must seem like a blindingly obvious Psy-ops move.
Lee, I'd urge you to take a step back and review what you think you know about contrails. Do you actually have any evidence to back up your belief? Or are you just assuming contrails are nefarious because it fits so nicely into your world view?
Hmmm, it might be interesting if it was. It's more projection than fact, which is what I thought you claimed as your reason to be here, not writing stories for kids. And what exactly is it that I think I know about contrails? Back up my 'belief'?
What belief is that? You seem to have built an idea out of....well,
do tell me where exactly I state these beliefs - and what they are. I'd be very intrigued to know what you have divined from the words I've written. Please highlight where I have stated any beliefs.
Oh yes, and there is a very long history of govt agencies being told what to and what no to do, by govt. It's one reason why they're called
govt agencies. A good example of an unpleasant incident ? The EPA was instructed by the executive at the time of 9/11 to obfuscate the air quality readings - so, as Giuliani told New Yorkers to, people could carry on shopping without worrying themselves about the vast amounts of asbestos dust floating about - a lot of dust, there was. So you see that it's not out of the realms of possibility - in fact it's likely - that govt agencies don't tell you the truth about what's best for you, often it's about what's best for them - I know it's very hard to believe for you.
Then MikeC: Mike...
The only thing I cannot take seriously is your unsupported assertion that something is somehow "wrong" here - you haven't actually articulated what it is you think is wrong (as far as I can see), and you haven't provided any evidence to support whatever it is that wrong thing may be.
If you could clearly state what it is you think the problem is, and what your evidence is, then that'd be a great help to me to understand what your position actually is.
thanks in advance
No problem. I refer you to this, one of many statements I have made along the same lines, but for some reason none of you can see why it is relevant to the discourse and so skirt around it:
Met people spend their lives being bothered about what makes clouds and when - why ignore this version when it is so prevalent? And it is very prevalent where I am.
Statements about 'the weather affects contrails rather than the other way round' - well Mike, I invite you to come to London and spend a day with me watching aircraft emissions turn into clouds - without the aircraft I cannot say whether those clouds would have formed or not - Mick says he knows that they would anyway, but for someone on the other side of the Atlantic it's a pretty tall order to make such a confident statement without actually being there, that's called conjecture and probably isn't right - and my experience gained from observing, has shown me that it is certainly the trails from the aircraft that are spreading and aggregating and covering the sky with clouds - not haze, clouds. Take away the aircraft and you take away the source of the clouds. This happens regularly and all methods of prediction, unreliable as they are (it's amusing how you shift from one foot to the other when it suits you on matters like this - if I use the methods then you say, ah, well actually - it's not quite accurate, you need to LOOK AT A SATELLITE IMAGE because that's really accurate, eh?) often do not support the reality of what is happening and this is plain to see.
As I'm sure you know, Nasa, Noaa and a couple others I can't recall brought out a joint 'contrail fact sheet' back in 2000 or 2001, it was in response to so many queries from the public on what was being observed. So, contrary to what Mick has said about it being a gradual increase, this suggests that there was a time when it became a lot more noticeable to Joe Public, so much so that they felt the need to produce a document to explain it.
Perhaps it's worthy of note that Russia and China have large scale geo-engineering infrastructure in place. They make no bones about spraying all kinds of stuff to prevent, mitigate, enhance or for whatever effect it is they want to induce. There was a story on the radio here a few weeks back: In Russia, a sack of cement had gone through someone's roof. How? It was dropped from an aircraft accidentally when they were using cement dust to dry up too much moisture in the air, ie. to prevent precipitation. Papers on sun-screens for mitigation of warming exist, the discussion has been going for decades, there are loads of 'research' stations, usually based at universities, around the world focused on weather manipulation; notably in Queensland Aus - for two years they were trying to mitigate the drought conditions and along came Yasi - a disaster. Did they overdo it? They were also aware of the danger of flooding in many of those areas, but did little to mitigate that. Man has always wanted to manipulate things - each other and the weather included. It appears the US and its allies are dragging their heels in this department - rooted helplessly to the spot and observing while 'rivals' develop more and more sophisticated methods. All this 'democracy' must be really slowing us down, eh? Get yer blinkers off.