Monsanto, Chemtrails & our future. Must see. No kidding.

[Drumster]

http://www.infowars.com/why-in-the-worl ... entary-hd/

[glenn]

Um . . . climate change is real. I'll believe science every time.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... lexed.html


Alex Jones - do the world a favour and stop spreading your pap!

[Drumster]

Based on that comment, you very obviously didn't even look at the movie which, btw, was produced by Michael J. Murphy and posted on a number of news sites including Alex Jones'.
Here it is on You tube...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEfJO0-cTis

One of the first things anyone must do in order to learn something is they must realize they don't yet know and actually have something to learn. This is tough for some people. A certain awareness is required and not everyone can muster it. Good luck.

[glenn]

Everybody likes a good conspiracy theory. What makes them so fun is that they seem so believable and true. However, this contrail theory has been very thoroughly debunked. This is entertainment, not science. The contrail conspiracy theory, like most other popular conspiracy theories, use some actual phenomenon, combined with pseudo-science, and good old fashioned "common sense" to convince people that something is happening that is in fact, not happening.

What makes me upset about these guys is that they are making a living off tricking people into believing problems that don't exist - in the face of real and documented issues that are actually facing the planet. Take the rising acidity of the world's oceans as an example. Numerous laboratory and field studies over the past few years underscore rising concerns that ocean acidification could devastate marine ecosystems on which millions of people depend for food and jobs. It is conceivable that this could wipe out all life in the oceans - and a dead ocean means a dead planet. This acidification is a direct consequence of preventable human activity. Most people don't even know, or care about this real threat exists. Now there is a conspiracy theory worth getting upset about.

Here is one of the best collection of articles regarding this - I'm sure, as a sceptic, you have already done your research and seen this set of articles, but I am posting this for the benefit of others who might take the contrail conspiracy theory seriously.
Debunked:http://contrailscience.com/what-in-the- ... -spraying/

Ironically, the widespread and persistent contrails that are obscuring the sun - from normal jet activity - may very well be affecting our climate. Current modelling suggests that these persistent contrails are actually contributing to global warming because they trap outgoing longwave radiation more efficiently than they reflect incoming solar radiation.

And - I absolutely agree with you:

One of the first things anyone must do in order to learn something is they must realize they don't yet know and actually have something to learn. This is tough for some people. A certain awareness is required and not everyone can muster it. Good luck.

[FalcoColumbarius]

From what I understand "Chemtrails" of some sort or another have been going on since the late 1940s. Here are the first three paragraphs from the Wikipedia article on this issue:

"History

Vincent Schaefer (1906–1993) discovered the principle of cloud seeding in July 1946 through a series of serendipitous events. Following ideas generated between himself and Nobel laureate Irving Langmuir while climbing Mt. Washington in New Hampshire, Schaefer, Langmuir's research associate, created a way of experimenting with supercooled clouds using a deep freeze unit of potential agents to stimulate ice crystal growth, i.e., salt, talcum powder, soils, dust and various chemical agents with minor effect. Then one hot and humid July 14, 1946, he wanted to try a few experiments at General Electric's Schenectady Research Lab.

He was dismayed to find that the deep freezer was not cold enough to produce a "cloud" using breath air. He decided to move the process along by adding a chunk of dry ice just to lower the temperature of his experimental chamber. To his astonishment, as soon as he breathed into the deep freezer, a bluish haze was noted, followed by an eye-popping display of millions of microscopic ice crystals, reflecting the strong light rays from the lamp illuminating a cross-section of the chamber. He instantly realized that he had discovered a way to change supercooled water into ice crystals. The experiment was easily replicated and he explored the temperature gradient to establish the −40˚C[18] limit for liquid water.

Within the month, Schaefer's colleague, the noted atmospheric scientist Dr. Bernard Vonnegut (brother of novelist Kurt Vonnegut) is credited with discovering another method for "seeding" supercooled cloud water. Vonnegut accomplished his discovery at the desk, looking up information in a basic chemistry text and then tinkering with silver and iodide chemicals to produce silver iodide. Together with Professor Henry Chessin, SUNY Albany, a crystallographer, he co-authored a publication in Science Magazine [19] and received a patent in 1975.[20] Both methods were adopted for use in cloud seeding during 1946 while working for the General Electric Corporation in the state of New York."

I saw the vid, all one hour, twelve minutes and fifty-five seconds of it. I haven't researched the sources at this point in time. Quite compelling arguments, although I must say that even though our children are important ~ I felt that bringing the children in at the end of the film to tug on the viewer's heart strings weakened the impact of the film. There seems to be a cross section of testimony, including from the military, albeit retired. Much of what he was talking about reflected the words of "The Art of War" By Sun Tzu (孫子兵法), which follows a dialectic path.

As I understand, a "con(densation)-trail" dissipates quickly as the heat from the engines' exhausts cool to the surrounding environment, where the alleged "Chem-trails" hang in the atmosphere for an extended period of time and it dissipates by falling out (spreading out). I have seen this happen a lot and it seems to be happening more often, perhaps because I've become aware of it. What is in the trails left by these aircraft I do not know. What I do know is "cloud seeding" has been evolving over the last sixty years, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a page or two on .gc.ca sites.

There is also a wikipedia article on the Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory that is linked to the cloud seeding article. Might be worth the read, as well.

Falco.

[Drumster]

I'm not really concerned with what others "believe" or not. That's largely a function of what they've been exposed to and their ability to confront truth.ie: "that which is". True is True, whether one "believes" it or not.

If one is unable, for whatever reason, to confront "that which is", he's not going to believe it and is to that degree going to be dealing in un-truths. Truth, that which is, exists whether one likes, agrees with, cares about, is upset by it or whatever. The truth doesn't care what you think. It just is.

I encourage everyone to do their own research and pull strings and weigh data while not accepting blanket statements from anyone. The best researchers present data. Take data and draw your own conclusions. Be aware of motivations beyond whatever someone may state.

Use your own perceptions and instincts and don't forget; "Follow the money."

[yojimbo]

I'm not really concerned with what others "believe" or not. That's largely a function of what they've been exposed to and their ability to confront truth.ie: "that which is". True is True, whether one "believes" it or not.

If one is unable, for whatever reason, to confront "that which is", he's not going to believe it and is to that degree going to be dealing in un-truths. Truth, that which is, exists whether one likes, agrees with, cares about, is upset by it or whatever. The truth doesn't care what you think. It just is.

I encourage everyone to do their own research and pull strings and weigh data while not accepting blanket statements from anyone. The best researchers present data. Take data and draw your own conclusions. Be aware of motivations beyond whatever someone may state.

Use your own perceptions and instincts and don't forget; "Follow the money."

Erm I have no dog in this cock fight, and I havent looked at any of the evidence for any of this, but I'm guessing you don't have a background in research science?

[glenn]

http://contrailscience.com

Poke around here a bit if you want to see what the sceptics think of the chemtrail conspiracy. The forum is very interesting, and you will find some lively discussion from both sides of this debate. You will quickly realize that much of the science cited is flawed and dubious.

For a theory like this to have any credibility, it needs to be peer reviewed. Many lay people do not grasp the importance of peer review in science. A major component of this involves citing findings that can be repeated and verified by other scientists. This theory has the attention of sceptics and supporters alike, and has for many years - yet there are not any peer reviewed publications that support it. If there is any truth to it, only science will convince the sceptics.

Remember, that which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

[FalcoColumbarius]

Just an interjection, I was listening to the CBC news this morning on Radio 1: It appears that due to a major drought that is currently being experienced in the US major corn crops are dying off. Apparently many corn farmers are going under because of this. Food prices are expected to rise 3-4%. This is one of the effects discussed in the video that Drumster posted. The timing is uncanny. Here is a link to the CBC's Radio 1 programme "The Current": http://www.cbc.ca/gsa/?q=US+drought+corn

Erm I have no dog in this cock fight, and I havent looked at any of the evidence for any of this, but I'm guessing you don't have a background in research science?

Although one must always keep an open mind to historic perspective, as well as making sure of one's sources ~ I'd like to refer to a quote by Bob Dylan:

• "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

If you are walking up the street and you see a car run a red light really fast and T-bone another car in the junction ~ do you need to be a medic or lawyer or mechanic or policeman to know there is something wrong? Surely we mustn't jump to conclusions but there are basic life lessons that must be respected as well. Also, to a certain degree we all have a background in research science as it was more than once my school teachers sent me home with homework that required research.

Falco.

P.S.: I would like to establish something: Whereas it has been widely known that Planes have been seeding the atmosphere with chemicals such as silver iodide (to create clouds that will deliver rain & snow), we are not really arguing whether there are chemtrails or not, are we? Evidently this has been reported, established, discussed in various meteorological circles &c., and recorded in historical annals. Really we are arguing about what is in the chemtrails.

[glenn]

I hope no one is taking any of this too personally, I like a good argument now and again.

Falco:

we are not really arguing whether there are chemtrails or not, are we?

Absolutely right. But, like you say this is historical information. However, it is a HUGE leap to say that since chemtrails have been documented historically, then common vapour trails must also be chemtrails. The scale that they are saying this is occurring at is massive, and very implausible. Most of the phenomena cited are perfectly normal and explainable (eg. normal contrails can, and do spread and persist for hours.) And their collection and sampling techniques are suspect, at best, and are of little scientific value - especially the water sampling. The best evidence they have are the thousands of pictures of contrails on the internet. It's silly really.

This reminds me of the story about the massive power outage in the eastern US. Many people became so distressed by what they witnessed in the sky that they made numerous calls to 911 to report this strange sky. What were they seeing? A perfectly normal starry sky - unobstructed by all the lights from the city. I see this chemtrail thing as a similar kind of hysteria. There is no convincing evidence besides the contrails themselves.

Having said all that - I do believe that we need to worry about contrails from normal air traffic. They are producing a significant amount of high cloud cover that did not exist before. And, as I have said earlier, such clouds have been shown to trap more outgoing energy than they reflect incoming solar energy - so the result is a net increase in global warming, not a decrease.

[FalcoColumbarius]

I like a good thought provoking dialogue, as well. I'll be sure to respect you guys in the morning.

However, it is a HUGE leap to say that since chemtrails have been documented historically, then common vapour trails must also be chemtrails.

I'm not saying that contrails are chemtrails. But since we are arguing the content of said alleged chemtrails and the possibility of aluminium, barium, strontium &c., being deployed in the firmament above... then I don't think it's that big a leap to pose a hypothesis of conspiracy, especially considering the acquired behaviour of the modern man. Actually we have only to look at history to weigh what the common denominators are throughout the ages. I don't think it's impossible that some megalomaniac might take an idea like cloud seeding and proceed a step further. And it's not to do with the money, either. Money is just the medium. It's about the power. I believe the game of control is so seductive to our species. Mind you, I also think that in the foundation ~ the medium is the message.

I understand that a condensation trail will dissipate after five minutes or so, not hang around for half an hour as it gradually spreads outward. It's hot exhaust in a super cool environment.

There have been phenomenon that I have experienced that I have no answer for. One time in the early '90s, six or seven of us had just left band rehearsal and were walking to a late night burger joint on Cambie. As we walked through the back streets we came across this most peculiar sight. It was black, but not the colour. It was an empty circular... portal ~ like a hole in the fabric of the night sky. An ephemeral bubble of time. We all could see it and remarked on it. We stood gripped with curiosity before it's mildly undulating calmness. Hypnotic. The thing was ~ we couldn't make out how close or far away it was. There was no surface to gauge by ~ it wasn't glossy or flat ~ it wasn't there. We must of stood for nearly twenty minutes observing it studying us. Then it left. It's acceleration was exponential as it shot upward and was gone in a second. No noise.

The other time was quite recent. It was during an overcast weekend morning in front of a café. A number of us were there, two of us definitely saw it. It was like a giant - knuckle on the other side of the cloud; moderately slowly making a crease. I thought it might be an aeroplane flying through the cloud except it appeared to be flying downward toward the Earth. We opined how odd it had appeared and as we considered it ~ the crease was steamed out of the cloud like a soft flush of grey transformation. We were mid sentence ~ and it was gone, like it was never there. Most peculiar.

While I cannot explain these events, I can speculate. When you see something like this, as it gracefully reveals it's
fleeting novelty ~ only to revert back into obscurity, as if it never happened... Yet we saw them as they performed in their unnatural transmogrifications.

• So you ask yourself: How much do I know? How far advanced is my species? Military especially?

One must keep an open view on these occurrences. Some things can be met with a cynical view, others must be regarded with wonderment. Descartes believed that one must doubt everything ~ but he could not doubt that he was experiencing. I find that much of the debunking is irrational. "but you can't deny science, that would be blasphemous."

I'm not keen on the sensationalism either, Glenn ~ and there's a lot of it about. But when one is presented with pieces of evidence, they need to be evaluated. Sometimes the circumstantial evidence becomes harder to avoid. I always found it ironic in the flood story of Noah, how everyone thought he was crazy for building his ark. He had no real data to support his story ~ a bit of a conspiracy theorist.

I don't know what is in those con/chem-trails up in the heavens ~ and as the title of the film suggests: Why on Earth would they want to spray? But one must also weigh the words of the retiring President Eisenhower and his warning regarding the military industrial complex; or some of the reports of retired Major General Albert Stubblebine, one time commanding General of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command. Can't throw those two out with the bath water.

Falco.

[yojimbo]

Although one must always keep an open mind to historic perspective, as well as making sure of one's sources ~ I'd like to refer to a quote by Bob Dylan:

• "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

No, but you need to be a meteorologist to take that information and draw meaningful conclusions from it, especially within a wider context. I dislike the accusation that anyone unwilling to accept a certain set version of the world is doing so because of their failings. ie, if you were more clever/experienced/wise you would see it as true. I know someone that debates like that on the internet, when he runs out of steam he restates the original argument and appends "think about it", as if previously no one was, and now that we actually engage brains we have no choice but to agree.

Additionally, in science, there is no such thing as truth anyway. 'Truth' precludes the possibility of further knowledge, its not far off 'faith'.

However if the question is trail the content, then yes, its 'true' that there could be things in them that shouldnt be. It's also true that the lizard people might have done it.

[glenn]

I understand that a condensation trail will dissipate after five minutes or so, not hang around for half an hour as it gradually spreads outward. It's hot exhaust in a super cool environment.

Not true.

It is not the heat, but the introduction of water from the exhaust into already saturated air that causes the persistent contrails. It can cause a chain reaction in the surrounding air where temperature and dew point are very close to each other and water is on the verge of condensing into cloud. Such persistent contrails have been observed since ww2. This is thoroughly documented - yet dismissed, or ignored because it does not support the conspiracy theory. Persistent contrails have been observed since WW2 - and long before any geo-engineering experiments:

"We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. " - Willard Reese- 457th Bomb Group

My recollection is that the contrails persisted for some time. While I don't recall timing them, I would guess that they could be seen for fifteen minutes or more. At times, Germany appeared to be almost covered by contrails as far as you could see. Essentially creating a cloud layer which could possibly persist for hours I suppose. The bombers' in more or less straight lines, the fighters', usually above us, more random as they criss crossed or circled. A common sight was the escorts dropping their tanks and heading off after the bad guys.

The contrails also tended to create a cloud layer which restricted the visibility of the following aircraft. So, contrails represented a problem to us and were to be avoided if at all possible. The idea of poison clouds is obviously ludicrous to those who have regularly experienced them.
Ronald D. Spencer
788th Bomb Squadron
467th Bomb Group
96th Bomb Wing
2nd Bomb Division
8th Air Force

And these were relatively small planes compared to the Jets of today. Multiply this by the thousands of flights that cross the sky constantly - and there is no mystery at all.

[FalcoColumbarius]

... I dislike the accusation that anyone unwilling to accept a certain set version of the world is doing so because of their failings. ie, if you were more clever/experienced/wise you would see it as true. I know someone that debates like that on the internet, when he runs out of steam he restates the original argument and appends "think about it", as if previously no one was, and now that we actually engage brains we have no choice but to agree. ...

Yes, bit of a party killer, that one.

Additionally, in science, there is no such thing as truth anyway. 'Truth' precludes the possibility of further knowledge, its not far off 'faith'.

I concur with your outlook. I see very few "truths" and have often viewed truth as a subjective vision. Science on the other hand, now there's a religion if ever there was one. I state this because, although the sciences are noble in nature, the way they are taken as authority by various agenda oriented groups sets a dedicated example that the Spanish Inquisition would applaud. Somewhere there is a quote by Marshall McLuhan, I'll paraphrase: "Statistics to a cause is like a lamp post to a drunk. Often used to prop things up rather than for enlightenment". As long as I remain in the classical world then I see gravity as a truth, or electricity. In the world of men, then it's pretty subjective. Reality, wow ~ what a concept.

No, but you need to be a meteorologist to take that information and draw meaningful conclusions from it, especially within a wider context. ...

Ah yes, meteorologists ~ I find darts at the local rubba to be more accurate. Do you remember, remember ~ November, 1987? The day Seven Oaks became "One Oak". I think I was watching ITV and the weatherman assured me that although there was a spot of bother off the south coast ~ it shouldn't effect us. Lifting open my window in Mitcham and breathing in the delightfully fresh air. Then I noticed all the elm trees listing to the east and the parked cars had all been deposited at the end of the street.
Now here are some perfect examples of the hens coming home to roost:



Falco.

[yojimbo]

Yeah I remember that, predominantly beech around here, tall straight trees that are great for furniture and great for being ripped out of the ground by high winds, decimated a lot of the woodland around here that year!