IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

12 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Chemtrail Footage Leaves Much Less Doubt That They Are Real, merged, edited title

amazed!
post Oct 27 2008, 10:39 AM
Post #21





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,886
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



I could not read the Japanese subtitles, but pictures like that prove precious little.

Was an analysis done of the condensed matter to prove their chemical makeup?

Had they been sprayed by airplanes, it would have been a beautiful formation, what with the nice curving path.

That is an unusual formation for clouds, but I have seen similar formations.

And nobody, including a very good friend of mine, has answered the question that IF these are antipersonnel in nature, why on earth are they spraying above 25000 feet?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Oct 27 2008, 12:42 PM
Post #22



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



There are existing patents for atmospheric dispersal of metal and metal salts.
There are active programs going on, like HAARP, putting millions of watts of power
into the upper atmosphere.
A 22 percent drop in sunlight from global dimming over recent years.
An surface increase of temperature of 1 degree over the duration of flight restrictions following 9/11. (when there would have been no jettrails)

Things I've noticed recently in the sky;

Concentric ripples, in perfect arcs, radiating from NNW (in the direction of Alaska, from me)
Strange, iridescent coloured clouds.
Clear cloudless summer days repeatedly overcast by noon,
solely, from dispersing jettrails.
Small clouds precipitating mists that disappears below the cloud.
Some days, much fewer planes, that leave no persistent trail. (although, I only noticed this on 5 or 6 separate days this entire summer)

It wasn't anything like this, when I was young.

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
keroseneaddict
post Oct 27 2008, 04:39 PM
Post #23





Group: Core Member
Posts: 130
Joined: 12-September 08
From: An Island off the coast of RSW
Member No.: 3,813



QUOTE (Zapzarap @ Oct 27 2008, 08:35 AM) *
yes1.gif



@Carl

Pilots are generally reluctant to offer theory wink.gif
All I can say (and BTW every other pilot or aviation professional) is that the Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory is full of impossibilities, illogicalness and patently false in many respects from an aviation POV.

But when it comes to put a good friend's mind to rest I'll try an explanation for the strange clouds in your vid:

1. I have no doubt that those parallel 'cloud-strings' could have been caused by airliners flying on the same flightlevel and on parallel tracks on the same airway (not at the same time, with the usual separation of course).

2. I can't easily explain the reason for the 'strings' beginning and ending in almost the same area to somebody not familiar with meteorological phenomenons like non laminar flow of air layers (like in a Mountain Wave) and conditions like temperature and dew-point changing with altitude and pressure, causing thick, persistent contrails or thin, short, quickly disapearing contrails.
You have to believe me there: Pilots have seen all variations of contrails emerging from KNOWN, civil air-traffic. The "alarming" photos spread by websites of chemtrail apologists show nothing, that hasn't always been the case in aviation since the use of jet engines.

The only thing is, that air-trafic has multiplied to a dramatic level - and there is no doubt in my mind, that polution of our higher atmosphere is getting a severe problem.

Result - on clear days with blue skies: lots of contrails!!! for speculations and 'chemtrail'-photos + vids. wink.gif



moving to debate
Not sure if this is still a research topic - sorry for my lack of time to carefully chose my words.



Zap hit the nail on the head.....contrails are rarely the same, disperse differently, and look different from the ground because they are at different altitudes and dispersion rates. With all the airlines scheduling their city pair flights around the same times, i.e. LGA-SFO all leaving so as to arrive before 5 p.m., air traffic control will ground hold all the 5:00 LGA-SFO so that their departures are "spaced". Oftentimes, the clearances will either by slightly different routing, or with today's flight management systems, they fly "offset tracks". Therefore, if you are on the ground underneath today's popular route, you can see parallel contrails or parallel contrails that follow "in trail". I've seen some strange S**T around the world, particularly over the NOPAC (northern pacific), but never anything that would make me think it was a chemtrail. IMO salute.gif salute.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Oct 27 2008, 07:19 PM
Post #24



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



I can really only go by observation about this topic.
The reason is that if there was a spray program, for
nefarious reasons, all official documents directly relating
to it would be sealed from the public, for, from what I see,
an operation this global in scale would have to be carried out from
above governments either with their ignorance or approval.

The only way that chem trails can be proven to exist is by samples
and testing of those samples.

This, I think, has been done.
The results have shown high levels of chemicals that coincidentally
happen to be the same as theorized in existing patents for atmospheric modification.

Are some persistent condensation trails really chemical laden smog for unknown purposes?
Hard to tell by just looking.
If they were,
and they didn't want you to know,
what would they tell you they are?

BTW, I don't think that the "strings" in the vid from Japan are chem trails or con trails,
I counted at least 5 "strings" that appeared to be exactly the same size and altitude, does this configure with any sort of engine arrangement on any jet?

I think they were the side effect of ELF electromagnetic radio waves.
The distance between the top of each string would have been the wavelength transmitted,
that caused them.

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
keroseneaddict
post Oct 27 2008, 08:03 PM
Post #25





Group: Core Member
Posts: 130
Joined: 12-September 08
From: An Island off the coast of RSW
Member No.: 3,813



QUOTE (lunk @ Oct 27 2008, 07:19 PM) *
I can really only go by observation about this topic.
The reason is that if there was a spray program, for
nefarious reasons, all official documents directly relating
to it would be sealed from the public, for, from what I see,
an operation this global in scale would have to be carried out from
above governments either with their ignorance or approval.

The only way that chem trails can be proven to exist is by samples
and testing of those samples.

This, I think, has been done.
The results have shown high levels of chemicals that coincidentally
happen to be the same as theorized in existing patents for atmospheric modification.

Are some persistent condensation trails really chemical laden smog for unknown purposes?
Hard to tell by just looking.
If they were,
and they didn't want you to know,
what would they tell you they are?

BTW, I don't think that the "strings" in the vid from Japan are chem trails or con trails,
I counted at least 5 "strings" that appeared to be exactly the same size and altitude, does this configure with any sort of engine arrangement on any jet?

I think they were the side effect of ELF electromagnetic radio waves.
The distance between the top of each string would have been the wavelength transmitted,
that caused them.

imo, lunk



The wx (weather) in the NOPAC area (Japan) always does weird things.....just a thought...I don't know the aircraft's altitude, but as waves of
cold air from a cold front meet the humidity coming off the ocean, these waves can form weird and repeated cloud formations.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Oct 27 2008, 08:54 PM
Post #26



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



It's the symmetry of the clouds.
Square clouds, round holes, equally spaced clouds radiating out like waves, in a constant curve.
These very geometrical formations in clouds are becoming more frequent,
and I don't think they are natural.

I remember looking up at an overcast sky with polarized sunglasses on.
It was covered in stripes of light and dark cloud.
The only other plausibly deniable explanation
is that this is the result of the explosion
in wireless communication.

Otherwise, there is more than just research going on in our atmosphere,
there is mass scale atmospheric manipulation covertly happening.
This makes me think that there just might be
chemicals dumped into our atmosphere by jets.

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Nov 8 2008, 08:58 PM
Post #27



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



I've posted these several places here before (pat2pdf.org is "down" today). Perhaps some will actually read them this time.

US Patent # 3899144

Patent number: 3899144
Filing date: Jul 22, 1974
Issue date: Aug 1975
Inventor: Werle et al.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=v144AAAAEBAJ&dq=3899144

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...ry=PN%2F3899144

"United States Patent 3,899,144
Werle , et al. August 12, 1975
Powder contrail generation

Abstract

Light scattering pigment powder particles, surface treated to minimize inparticle cohesive forces, are dispensed from a jet mill deagglomerator as separate single particles to produce a powder contrail having maximum visibility or radiation scattering ability for a given weight material.
Inventors: Werle; Donald K. (Hillside, IL), Kasparas; Romas (Riverside, IL), Katz; Sidney (Chicago, IL)
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy (Washington, DC)
Appl. No.: 05/490,610
Filed: July 22, 1974
----------------------------------
Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming

http://www.google.com/patents?id=MJUjAAAAEBAJ&dq=5003186

Abstract
A method is described for reducing atmospheric or global warming resulting from the presence of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere, i.e., from the greenhouse effect. Such gases are relatively transparent to sunshine, but absorb strongly the long-wavelength infrared radiation released by the earth. The method incudes the step of seeding the layer of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere with particles of materials characterized by wavelength-dependent emissivity. Such materials include Welsbach materials and the oxides of metals which have high emissivity (and thus low reflectivities) in the visible and 8-12 micron infrared wavelength regions.

Patent number: 5003186
Filing date: Apr 23, 1990
Issue date: Mar 26, 1991
Inventors: David B. Chang, I-Fu Shih
Assignee: Hughes Aircraft Company

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...ry=PN%2F5003186
------------------------------------
Process for absorbing ultraviolet radiation using dispersed melanin

http://www.google.com/patents?id=j-chAAAAEBAJ&dq=5003186

Abstract
This invention is a process for absorbing ultraviolet radiation in the atmosphere by dispersing melanin, its analogs, or derivatives into the atmosphere. By appropriate choice of melanin composition, size of melanin dispersoids, and their concentration, the melanin will absorb some quantity of ultraviolet radiation and thereby lessen its overall effect on the critters who would normally absorb such radiation.

Patent number: 5286979
Filing date: Jun 7, 1993

Issue date: Feb 15, 1994
Inventors: David L. Berliner, Helen Leong

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...ry=PN%2F5286979
------------------------------
Again, Clifford Carnicom is a US scientist who has been studying this phenomena for years:

http://www.carnicom.com/conright.htm

Here is a scientific report on the "duration" of "contrails" vs. other observed phenomena that discusses altitude and unidentifiable planes.

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/report.shtml#summary

Here is the analysis from a HEPA filter showing disproportionate levels of metals and metal oxides:

Chemtrails: Analysis From A Hepa Air Filter, This is what we are breathing
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=13334

Also see my posts #35 and #37 from June 2008 here:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10744033

More info at:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=10773

This is just a little of the "publicly" available information too.

EDIT: To re-emphasize United States Patent 3,899,144 above, is anyone going to tell me these are red and blue "CON-densation trails"? There is a difference in the two, my friends.

http://www.fencecheck.com/airshows/Wonders...ersary_Airshow/

Jet-compatible airshow smoke generators:
http://www.sandersaircraft.com/generators_smokewinder.asp

http://www.sandersaircraft.com/manuals/Smo...5-6_01Mar08.pdf
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Nov 8 2008, 09:07 PM
Post #28



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Here's the math and science on vapor condensation from Cliff Carnicom, again:

http://www.carnicom.com/model1.htm

http://www.carnicom.com/model2.htm

Distance formation model
http://www.carnicom.com/distance1.htm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GroundPounder
post Nov 8 2008, 09:40 PM
Post #29





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,748
Joined: 13-December 06
From: maryland
Member No.: 315



so if his equations are accurate (they didn't look bad), then his resulting numbers don't match what some folks believe to have observed...

the solar flux certainly varies depending on latitude and time of year( have to check), the temperatures he gave seem ballpark close

he does make an assumption about the size of the ice crystals and that the incident energy is absorbed.
the absorption would probably be pretty close for most wavelengths, but again that would need verification... snow is very reflective

so what's the error bar look like on this one?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
keroseneaddict
post Nov 8 2008, 09:59 PM
Post #30





Group: Core Member
Posts: 130
Joined: 12-September 08
From: An Island off the coast of RSW
Member No.: 3,813



QUOTE (dMole @ Nov 8 2008, 08:07 PM) *
Here's the math and science on vapor condensation from Cliff Carnicom, again:

http://www.carnicom.com/model1.htm

http://www.carnicom.com/model2.htm

Distance formation model
http://www.carnicom.com/distance1.htm


Good science, but, we must remember that water vapor is not the only particulant in a kero burning engine. As I remember, when kero is burned, the carbon particulant size is larger than normal.........But, then again, I am getting old and have spent too much time in airplanes...frys the brain...smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Nov 8 2008, 10:04 PM
Post #31



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



I'm not certain that Clifford's was intended to be a quantitative analysis from what I read. If you follow the reference at the link(s) above, you find what I'd call a "majority" of "qualitative YES" at:

http://www.carnicom.com/report.htm

I've observed the "dichotomy" photographed above firsthand enough times over Western US skies to support Carnicom's assertions. I'm also quite familiar with low pressure systems and condensates.

The dismissive explanations given so far sound quite similar to this (incidentally the same guys who refused to provide JP-8 samples for testing in the Discovery Channel's "Best Evidence: Chemical Contrails" program) :

http://www.carnicom.com/af1.htm

Discovery Channel Program
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/discovery.html

Here's a bit about Mr. Carnicom's background:

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guests/569.html

"He was previously a research scientist and federal employee for 15 years with three different agencies, including the United States Department of Defense, the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. His technical background is extensive in the fields of geodetic science, advanced mathematics, computer science and the physical sciences. "

EDIT: Was I the only one who read the info at:

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/report.shtml

"The following table represents the confirmed unidentifiable jets that were observed leaving highly persistent trails of several hours or more. Length is a generalized range as the exact value is difficult to determine due to the large scale of persistence. As mentioned in the data collection process, "Sep." representing degrees of separation and "Temp." representing degrees celsius are the best-case values for contrail production for that day."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Nov 9 2008, 12:10 AM
Post #32



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (keroseneaddict @ Nov 8 2008, 06:59 PM) *
Good science, but, we must remember that water vapor is not the only particulant in a kero burning engine. As I remember, when kero is burned, the carbon particulant size is larger than normal...

According to Figure 3.3 of the following (p. 21/96 in the PDF):

http://www.chevronglobalaviation.com/docs/...tech_review.pdf

Jet A per ASTM D 1655 is:

0.10 mg KOH/g Acidity
25% Vol, max, Aromatics
0.30% Sulfur, mass
0.003 Sulfur, mercaptan, mass
3.0% Naphthalenes, vol%, max.
7 mg/100 ml, existent gum, max.
--------------
According to the Jet-A MSDS sheet at:

http://www.spragueenergy.com/documents/MSD...20Fuel%2006.pdf

We have 99% kerosene, and <1% polycyclic hydrocarbons
----------------
According to:

http://www.intox.org/databank/documents/ch...fuel/cie768.htm

"There is no standard formula for Jet A. The straight-run kerosene stream is used for aviation fuel production. Jet A and Jet A-1 are mixtures of aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons with carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C9-C16 and which meet the requirements of ASTM specification D 1655.(24) Jet A and Jet A-1 only differ in freezing point. According to the specification, the maximum allowed level of aromatic hydrocarbons is 25% (by volume) and 3% naphthalenes (by volume). Total sulfur (0.3% by weight) and mercaptan sulfur (0.003% by weight) are present as impurities. Jet A has a distillation range of less than 205 to 300 deg C (401 to 572 deg F). The physical properties given in this review are either for specific products, from the specification or for straight-run kerosene (CAS 8008-20-6). The specification lists a number of additives that may be used in jet fuels. Typical additives include an antioxidant (e.g. 2,6-di-tert-butylphenol and tert- and tri-tert-butylphenols), a metal deactivator (e.g., N,N- disalicylidene-1,2-propanediamine), an electrical conductivity additive (e.g. Stadis 450), a static inhibitor, a fuel system icing inhibitor (e.g. diethylene glycol monomethyl ether), a corrosion of steel inhibitor, a lubrication improver, a biocide, a fuel lubricity additive, and a thermal stability improver. The presence of additives can contribute significantly to the overall hazards of a particular jet fuel product. Consult the manufacturer/supplier of your specific product for additional information."
---------------------

So we've got 99%-ish of 9-to-16-carbon hydrocarbon "kerosene."

According to page 4 of the following for samples collected at Miramar Naval Air Station in San Diego, CA:

http://www.areco.org/pdf/ParticulateEmissi...Engines1996.pdf

"Chemical analyses of jet engine exhaust samples indicate that the samples contain heavy metals." (Zinc, copper, and beryllium all at levels 100% above the control, with lead at 50% above, cobalt at 25% above, and vanadium at 28.6% above)
------------------------
I realize that some erosion of the metallic jet engine surfaces should occur at high heat and airflow, but I would expect mere traces from this with well-maintained and well-designed engines.

See that HEPA link provided above:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=13334

If one will allow me to paraphrase that thread though, barium and aluminum (and aluminum oxides) are the most-prevalent alarming pollutants observed in samples. Here's a little about barium and other metal vapors at my post # 8:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10742874
------------------
Now if we look at some of the engines alleged to have been in the 9/11 planes, we see that HC, CO, and NOx are the only "emissions" monitored:

RB211-535E4B
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/702/3RR034_01102004.pdf

PW2037
http://www.qinetiq.com/docs/aed/1PW039-20020702.pdf
-------------------
More on jet engine emissions:
http://www.wired.com/cars/futuretransport/...6/ecoaviation23

ASME Subscription-only paper (that I don't currently have):

http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/Ge...ps&gifs=yes

Kinetics of Jet Fuel Combustion Over Extended Conditions: Experimental and Modeling
J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power -- April 2007 -- Volume 129, Issue 2, 394 (10 pages)
DOI:10.1115/1.2364196

"The oxidation of kerosene (Jet-A1) has been studied experimentally in a jet-stirred reactor at 1 to 40 atm and constant residence time, over the high temperature range 800–1300 K, and for variable equivalence ratio 0.5<phi<2. Concentration profiles of reactants, stable intermediates, and final products have been obtained by probe sampling followed by on-line and off-line GC analyses. The oxidation of kerosene in these conditions was modeled using a detailed kinetic reaction mechanism (209 species and 1673 reactions, most of them reversible). In the kinetic modeling, kerosene was represented by four surrogate model fuels: 100% n-decane, n-decane-n-propylbenzene (74%/26% mole), n-decane-n-propylcyclohexane (74%/26% mole), and n-decane-n-propylbenzene-n-propylcyclohexane (74%/15%/11% mole). The three-component model fuel was the most appropriate for simulating the JSR experiments. It was also successfully used to simulate the structure of a fuel-rich premixed kerosene-oxygen-nitrogen flame and ignition delays taken from the literature. "
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
p.w.rapp
post Nov 9 2008, 05:36 AM
Post #33





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,743
Joined: 19-October 06
From: European Protectorate
Member No.: 110



QUOTE (dMole @ Nov 9 2008, 01:58 AM) *
I've posted these several places here before (pat2pdf.org is "down" today). Perhaps some will actually read them this time.

US Patent # 3899144

Patent number: 3899144
Filing date: Jul 22, 1974
Issue date: Aug 1975
Inventor: Werle et al.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=v144AAAAEBAJ&dq=3899144



dM, with all due respect, my friend.
You asked me to 'read your links this time'.
I really tried to be open minded and hoped to find some proof for the 'chemtrail' case this time.
Proof for the deliberate poisoning of mankind (or at least for some other purpose like 'weather-modification') by large scale use of jet-aircraft flying on high fligh-levels.

here is what your VERY FIRST LINK brings up:

US Patent # 3899144 Aug. 12 1975
[img]http://www.google.com/patents?id=v144AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA3&img=1&zoom=4&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U2Wzv8tAruZIFx6BJdFDPBeIqDRPg&ci=90%2C474%2C432%2C226&edge=1[/img]
POWDER CONTRAIL GENERATION Werle et al.

This patent is a 'Contrail Generator' for aircraft target vehicles.
Obviously for airforce exercises and airshows and the like. Operating also near ground level...
(i.e.too low for 'natural' contrails)

C'mon dM rolleyes.gif



Here's a deal among friends:

- You move (or merge) all chemtrail topics flying around on P4T into the Alt.Theories Forum.
- I'll continue to read your posts and links summarized on this tread and give you, as far as I can, my genuine and unbiased opinion.


OK?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Nov 9 2008, 06:25 AM
Post #34



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



We only want to study nuclear explosions
to help farmers plow fields and for peace
time building demolitions.

Ya right.

Are they really going to tell us if there is a plan to force a mass extinction event?

My dear old mother, mentioned to me that she hadn't seen as many birds around.
If they're spraying toxic chemicals into the air, the birds may be affected first.
Canary in a coal mine, sort of thing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Nov 9 2008, 06:48 AM
Post #35



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Well, I mostly have moved those threads p.w., except for this one someone moved here. wink.gif If you go to the full text of the patents at the USPTO (Patent office), you will also find:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...ry=PN%2F3899144

"An earlier known method in use for contrail generation involves oil smoke trails produced by injecting liquid oil directly into the hot jet exhaust of an aircraft target vehicle. The oil vaporizes and recondenses being the aircraft producing a brilliant white trail. Oil smoke trail production requires a minimum of equipment; and, the material is low in cost and readily available. However, oil smoke requires a heat source to vaporize the liquid oil and not all aircraft target vehicles, notably towed targets, have such a heat source. Also, at altitudes above about 25,000 feet oil smoke visibility degrades rapidly.
...
Aircraft target vehicles are used to simulate aerial threats for missile tests and often fly at altitudes between 5,000 and 20,000 feet at speeds of 300 and 400 knots or more. The present invention is also suitable for use in other aircraft vehicles to generate contrails or reflective screens for any desired purpose. "

Perhaps most importantly, the patent describing the technology developed 30+ years ago for "powder contrail" generation (aren't those supposed to be from condensation of vapor molecules?) we find the chemicals used by the device:

"8. Apparatus as in claim 1 wherein the formulation of said powder consists of 85% by weight of TiO.sub.2 pigment of approximately 0.3 micron media particle size, 10% by weight of colloidal silica of 0.007 micron primary particle size, and 5% by weight of silica gel having an average particle size of 4.5 microns.
...
The extremely fine particulate nature (0.007.mu. primary particle size) of Cobot S--101 Silanox grade, for example, of colloidal silica minimizes the amount needed to coat and separate the TiO.sub.2 particles, and the hydrophobic surface minimizes the affinity of the powder for absorbtion of moisture from the atmosphere. Adsorbed moisture in powders causes liquid bridges at interparticle contacts and it then becomes necessary to overcome the adsorbed-liquid surface tension forces as well as the weaker Van der Waals' forces before the particles can be separated.
...
A typical powder composition used is shown in Table 1. This formulation was blended intimately with a Patterson-Kelley Co. twin shell dry LB-model LB--2161 with intensifier.

Table 1 _CONTRAIL POWDER FORMULATION Ingredient % by Weight
TiO.sub.2 (e.g., DuPont R-931) 85 median particle size 0.3.mu. Colloidal Silica (e.g., Cabot S-101 Silanox) 10 primary particle size 0.007.mu. Silica gel (e.g., Syloid 65) 5 average particle size 4.5.mu."
----------------------
Looking at the MSDS hazard sheets for Titanium dioxide we find:

http://www.sciencestuff.com/msds/C2878.html

"Section 3 Hazard Identification (Also see section 11)
Harmful if swallowed. May cause irritation. Avoid breathing vapors, or dusts. Use with adequate ventilation. Avoid contact with eyes, skin, and clothes. Wash thoroughly after handling. Keep container closed. "

For silica, the MSDS says:

http://msds.dupont.com/msds/pdfs/EN/PEN_09004a3580139943.pdf

"HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential Health Effects
Colloidal Silica
Oral LD50: >10,000 mg/kg in rats
Skin contact may cause skin irritation with discomfort or rash.
Eye contact may cause eye irritation with discomfort, tearing, or blurring of vision.
Inhalation may cause drying of mucous membranes and irritation of nose, throat, and lungs with nosebleeds, cough, difficulty breathing or shortness of breath. Based on animal experiments, long term exposures to high doses could lead to pulmonary inflammation and subsequent development of chronic lung disease."

For silica gel,

http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/S1610.htm

"3. Hazards Identification

Emergency Overview
--------------------------
CAUTION! MAY CAUSE IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES, AND RESPIRATORY TRACT.
...
Inhalation:
May cause dryness and irritation to mucous membranes, nose, and throat. Symptoms may include coughing, sore throat, and wheezing.
...
Skin Contact:
May cause irritation with dryness and abrasion.
Eye Contact:
May cause irritation, redness and pain.
Chronic Exposure:
Repeated exposure may cause symptoms similar to those listed for acute effects. Synthetic amorphous silica does not produce silicosis. "
-------------------------------
Now on "silicosis" we find:

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/silfact1.html

What Is Silicosis?
Silicosis is a disabling, nonreversible and sometimes fatal lung disease caused by overexposure to respirable crystalline silica. Silica is the second most common mineral in the earth's crust and is a major component of sand, rock, and mineral ores. Overexposure to dust that contains microscopic particles of crystalline silica can cause scar tissue to form in the lungs, which reduces the lungs' ability to extract oxygen from the air we breathe. Typical sand found at the beach does not pose a silicosis threat.
More than 1 million U.S. workers are exposed to crystalline silica. Each year, more than 250 American workers die with silicosis. There is no cure for the disease, but it is 100 percent preventable if employers, workers, and health professionals work together to reduce exposures.
In addition to silicosis, inhalation of crystalline silica particles has been associated with other diseases, such as bronchitis and tuberculosis. Some studies also indicate an association with lung cancer.

----------------------
Now patent 5,003,186 tells us:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...ry=PN%2F5003186

"Assignee: Hughes Aircraft Company (Los Angeles, CA)
...
2. The method of claim wherein said material comprises one or more of the oxides of metals.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein said material comprises aluminum oxide.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein said material comprises thorium oxide.
...
One proposed solution to the problem of global warming involves the seeding of the atmosphere with metallic particles. One technique proposed to seed the metallic particles was to add the tiny particles to the fuel of jet airliners, so that the particles would be emitted from the jet engine exhaust while the airliner was at its cruising altitude. While this method would increase the reflection of visible light incident from space, the metallic particles would trap the long wavelength blackbody radiation released from the earth. This could result in net increase in global warming.
...
The particles may be seeded by dispersal from seeding aircraft; one exemplary technique may be via the jet fuel as suggested by prior work regarding the metallic particles. Once the tiny particles have been dispersed into the atmosphere, the particles may remain in suspension for up to one year. "
----------------------------
That was a patent filed publicly: April 23, 1990.

BTW, the US Navy was recently worried about "terraist" UAV "cropdusters:"

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2006/Jul/gormleyJul06.asp

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2006/Jul/gormleyJul06.pdf
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Nov 9 2008, 07:25 AM
Post #36



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



QUOTE (dMole @ Nov 9 2008, 02:48 AM) *
One technique proposed to seed the metallic particles was to add the tiny particles to the fuel of jet airliners, so that the particles would be emitted from the jet engine exhaust while the airliner was at its cruising altitude. While this method would increase the reflection of visible light incident from space, the metallic particles would trap the long wavelength blackbody radiation released from the earth. This could result in net increase in global warming.


Ah ha!
So chem trails could be there to prevent an upcoming ice age.
...unfortunately, the chemicals they need to use, are toxic,
so the project would have to be carried out on a need to know basis...

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Nov 9 2008, 07:31 AM
Post #37



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



To recap, we've got photographic evidence at posts #4, 6, and 9 above. We've got the firsthand observations of lunk, OF, and I over the space of several years. We've got at least 2 known US patents, the "powder contrail" one of which dates to 1975 and was assigned to the US Navy (and the patent numbers usually "expand" by referencing others in research). You've got 2 scientists telling you quite plainly, and I gave you the chemicals used along with Carnicom's condensation equations with his observation data. You've got a link above to an independent lab's HEPA filter analysis that found barium, aluminum, and other pollutants exceeding acceptable levels. You've got the USAF paper Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025.

Many/most of you have got these lingering "trails" right outside your windows and doors where you merely need to look up and see them, often every day.

Finally, you've got the USAF (EPA, NASA, MSM, and a few others) telling you no, these are an "atmospheric condensation effect" and a "conspiracy theory hoax." Oh yes, the USAF wouldn't provide JP-8 samples when requested for analysis by Discovery Channel. Beware partial truths, and I'll trust the patents and the technology. I won't forget this DoD/administration's past behavior either.

Just for KA, the USAF/EPA/NASA "CT" stance is available at the Wiki: wink.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bill
post Nov 9 2008, 08:09 AM
Post #38





Group: Guest
Posts: 1,922
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 147



"You have to believe me there: Pilots have seen all variations of contrails emerging from KNOWN, civil air-traffic. The "alarming" photos spread by websites of chemtrail apologists show nothing, that hasn't always been the case in aviation since the use of jet engines."




This sounds very familiar

I know I have heard similar "arguments" before about another subject ...


let me see... what was it



it has that tone that is so familiar






Oh I remember now








You have to believe me here I am an expert, Ther is NO WAY that the WTC could have been destroyed by bombs or explosives in the buildings. It was the heat from the planes. There could not possibly be a conspiracy other than the Abrab hijack model. There would have to be too many people keeping the secret it could not have been such a vast conspiracy, impossible.

You just have to trust me on this 911 has been investigated and we know what happened, just read the report. these <chemtrail conspiracy theorists> 911 conspiracy theorists are just insane.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bill
post Nov 9 2008, 08:56 AM
Post #39





Group: Guest
Posts: 1,922
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 147



dMol

you have nailed it


the science has proved that 'chemtrails', whatever they are, are proven to be different than normal contrails


barium is not a normal component of our atmosphere, neither is aluminum

it has been proven that when chemtrails are prevailent the concentration of barium collected on air filters increases

there are patents that mention aerosol metals such as barium, aluminum and titanium to produce weather effects, enhance HAARP effects etc etc etc

anyone that disbelieves the phenomenon called chemtrails is just not paying attention and still drinking out of the same Kool-aid pitcher as the 911 OCT believers

I have said this before

I was in Taiwan for almost 2 weeks a year ago

There were absolutely no chemtrails ever, none, zip, nadda, not one

quickly disappearing contrails yes

Perhaps someone here could explain how the atmosphere over Taiwan is so completely different than the atmosphere over the US and Eurpope that chemtrails do not form

I have also observed that normal contrails that disappear within a few minutes are at the same altitude as chemtrails (I have observed this at cruise altitude and from the ground) (it is easy to determine altitude fromthe ground just take a sighting at 45 degrees and note the mileage on your odometer ---drive until the chemtrail is directly overhead and note the mileage--- 7 miles equals about 35,000 feet when the contrail/chemtrail is over head)

I have observed aircraft flying in formation within a quarter mile of each other doing turns and laying down what we call chemtrails

I have seen oily looking yellow overcasts from chemtrails that have circular rainbows around the sun

I have been on this earth 58 years and this phenomenon has only been around for about the last 12 years

There was no dramatic increase in air traffic 12 years ago

if anything the modern jets are significantly cleaner than the jets of 25 years ago

yet 25 years ago lingering chemtrails never happened

At this point in time I include chemtrail skeptics in the same category as 911 OCT believers

This post has been edited by bill: Nov 9 2008, 09:07 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Nov 9 2008, 09:15 AM
Post #40



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



I'm planning on getting,
yet, another air filter.

Though, I think that whoever is spraying
should, at least, be providing them.

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

12 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st April 2014 - 03:42 AM