Thanks for the clarification Kristen. Like I've said before, I don't think qualifications are that important - it's the facts that are important. Qualifications usually only come into play when someone makes an "appeal to authority" - like "X says this, and X is in the air force, so it must be true".
I presume you still believe in chemtrails? Do you have what you would consider to be some "smoking gun" piece of evidence?
This is probably going to be a very long response, but you ask about the "smoking gun". For me this was when I First heard about chemtrails. My mother had taught me the difference between "passenger/commercial" airline con-trails, and "military jet" con-trails. I can remember the difference was 1. That commercial where much lower, military much higher, and commercial trails "dissipated" a;most immediately, and military trails took a couple of hours to fully dissipate; leaving a trails as long as the horizon, where as commercial trails never stayed longer than a couple minutes, max. As a child my skies were always "clear blue".
One day, not having ever heard the term "chem-trail", my friend Donny pointing at the sky, asks, "What is that"? I look up, and respond, "oh, that's just a con....". I didn't even finish my sentence, before I noticed a difference in what I "knew" and "know", as a con-trail.. The thought(s) going through my mind was, con-trails don't "fall" out the sky, and they shouldn't even form at all at that low altitude." Therefore, I said to Donny, "I don't know." He then asked, "Do you think it's one of those "chem-trails" I heard of?" My response was, "I haven't heard anything of this.", but this began our research.
I would turn your attention first to the attached two videos: The most interesting thing about these two videos, is in the first one, you can actually clearly see the difference between a con-trail and a chem-trail. The two planes are "seemingly" right beside each other, for the purpose of the video anyway. It is imporatant to make note that in reality they are very far apart, and at different altitudes. However, again the plane that is making the trail that doesn't dissipate almost immediately is actually flying at an altitude that shouldn't create a con-trail at all. You can research this via googling levels of atmosphere and condensation trails. Qoute "Contrails are human-induced clouds that usually form at very high altitudes (usually above 8 km - about 26,000 ft) where the air is extremely cold (less than -40ºC). Because of this, contrails form not when an airplane is taking off or landing, but while it is at cruise altitude." This is from the NASA website, good enought of an "authority" for you? http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/faq.php
Please, please, please note that the "appleman chart" is very useful, in this equation, as there were many days in the desert where "extremely" dry conditions occur, on "extremely" dry days that there should have not been con-trails, but there were "chem-trails".
The second video is very important, because you can see the airplane turn around, and head back in the same direction. The important fact of this is "PLANES NEVER DO THIS". They have an entry and exit gate. they don't just fly around randomly, or at least, aren't supposed to. This plane "should have" gone over the horizon, and not returned for hours, perhaps even days. Flight paths are not things air traffic controllers like to mess around with. This was not a "pleasure" plane, up looking at the fireworks om a fourth of July!
Next, I finally convinced my boyfriend, after two years of denial that chem-trails exist. What did it for him was:
Three videos with weatherman talking about military spraying showing up radar, and Scott Stevens. I know you think little of him, but this is a quote from Above Top Secret from OzWeatherman, "I am certainly not here to argue Scott Stevens credentials. The guy has over 20 years experience studying weather patterns and the atmosphere.", and also on that thread is a post from American Meteorological Society:
As pwe the AMS 20 years is well over the "and has at least three years professional experience in meteorology..."
I also, asked my father-in-law, who has a PHD in physics, yes, he is a dosctor of physics doe his opinion, and after looking into it, himself, he now believes in chem-trails.
Also, please take a look at this spwaking engegement from Ms. Meghan, it is different from the one you posted:
She goes into a couple things that were a bit unclear in the video here.
I can not explain what it's like to look at my skies, and see them ruined. It hurts my soul to never see blue sky, anymore. They are now always covered. I can not explain what it's like to know "a truth", and have seemingly, inteligent people not be able to see the truth. Don't you "remember" being a kid and laying on a hillock and staring into that vast "nothingness" of blue. Try that today, and all you will get is white lines criss-crossing the sky.
Last edited by a moderator: