Leonard Clampett,

your last link leads to a - rather boring - video consisting of contrail after contrail. Where does it proove that Evergreen “is in on it”?

The text shows how Evergreen is trying to market their remodeled 747. Where does it indicate that there is a “chemtrails contract” with the US Airforce?

After many months it is clear that this site is an absolute waste of electrons regarding chemtrails and those who claim they do not occur are either deficient in the research arts or stooges and dupes of the elite.

Cheers,

Leonard Clampett

BREAKING CHEMTRAIL SCIENTIST MURDERED AFTER GOING ON NATIONAL RADIO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDF_dAuZXnM&feature=youtu.be

Leonard Clampett,

nothing new in your link - again. Do you ever double-check your “findings”?

http://metabunk.org/threads/three-chemtrail-scientists-murdered.1600/

metabumk self-describes very well. We wonder, Josh Anonymous, why it is you are so secret about your identity, and why it is you push so hard to attempt to get others to toe/tow the establishment line and can only conclude that you must be either a stooge for the establishment, or a dupe. Which can it be?

Cheers,

Leonard Clampett ARN 018833

Leonard Clampett,

so did you check out the content of the “BREAKING” video? Where does it mention “chemtrail scientists”? Can you give the minute/second where that happens?

Are the findings in the posting that I linked wrong? Did you check them at all?

I’m concerned about facts and issues, not about calling people names.

Josh Anonymous,

Rather than hiding behind anonymity, please advise who you are, what your experience is and what factual evidence you have to rebut the speaker in this video referred to below. As a denier you are claiming something does not exist, so it is up to you to prove your claim. As chemtrails exist, and can be seen by competent observers, I believe you have set yourself an impossible task. However, try to get on with it and prove your case.

http://projectcamelotportal.com/blog/1792-dane-wiggington-geoengineering-activist

Cheers,

LEONARD CLAMPETT
50 Harding Street
Enoggera 4051
Tel: 0412 068 186

Leonard Clampett,

Non-existence cannot be proven. Known fact.
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/146-proving-non-existence

Fortunately, science does explain persistant contrails, so there is no need for an alternative (and much less plausible) explanation.

Regarding the video you linked, please pick one topic that you think should be discussed first. Give the time into the video for a reference.

Allow me to treat claims by Dane Wigington with the utmost skepticism. Recently he tried to measure sunlight UV values and failed badly - like on many issues before:
http://metabunk.org/threads/debunked-dane-wigingtons-claims-that-uv-is-off-the-charts.2097/

Wrong interpretation/calculation of measurements - again:
http://metabunk.org/threads/debunked-dane-wigingtons-claims-that-uv-is-off-the-charts.2097/#post-59145

BTW, why are you so obsessed with names? I could not care less about your identity. It has no relevance - either a claim is correct or it is not, no matter who made it.

Aerospace Worker: “I Installed Chemtrails Devices” @ Monday Demonstration 5/12/2014 - ENGLISH SUBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnCaE_3hImY#t=175

Interesting stuff, Leonard Clampett.

There is something missing though - the site you linked to forgot to include an essential document, a statement by “Jens”. The document’s name is “erklaerung.pdf” - see the complete document listing on this page.

In this document, Jens states the following (English translation by myself):
“[...] Furthermore I’d like to stress that neither myself nor those co-workers which I was able to ask about it - ever found something during maintenance work on civil aircraft (passenger and freight planes) that would be evidence for any spraying conducted with special equipment at or inside the planes. [...]”

I leave it to you to find and double-check that paragraph in the German original.

I think this ‘whistleblower’ has more technical knowledge than the average chemtrail believer - but all he can state is that there was spray equipment on an old plane which was to be followed by a research plane from a well-known non-military institute to conduct measurements (google DLR).

We don’t know why exactly he was fired from his job, but obviously he never had to sign a confidentiality agreement. Also, he was already a chemtrail activist at that point - not a good reference for an aircraft technician.

Annother interesting link about the plane in question:
ainonline.com/aviation-news/aviation-international-news/2007-03-28/fairchild-dornier-328-and-728-get-new-leases-life

Quote from that article:

“AvCraft owns and operates a 328 equipped with a water-spraying rig to test de-icing systems on other aircraft.”

It’s very likely that this is the plane that “Jens” saw. Here is a picture of the whole thing.

I note that Josh Anonymous must have a short and long term memory problem, as, if he/she trawled the archives on this thread he/she would see that I have iterated that in my long experience in aviation (both as a maintenance engineer and a pilot) I have never seen any spray devices on any civil airline aircraft, Furthermore, as engineers and pilots know their aircraft inside out we would notice any extraneous fittings placed on aircraft. So it’s back to asking Josh Anonymous again to explain how he believes an aircraft can lift 300 tonnes of Avtur/Jet A1 to 36,000 feet and turn it into 1,050 tonnes of H2O, as it was claimed on this site that burning a tonne of this fuel produces 3.5 tonnes of H2O. He and others have not seemed to fully understand that the H2O droplets formed as a result of expulsion from a jet-pipe were in the atmosphere prior to the passage of the aircraft and the induction air is compressed some 50 times in the Rolls Royce Trent 1000, for instance. In other words 50 cubic metres of atmosphere at 35,000 feet is compressed to 1 cubic metre

[Rolls-Royce has increased the overall compression ratio from the Trent 700 to the Trent 1000 from 33 to 50, which is the same pressure as that experienced half a kilometer beneath the surface of the ocean, Nuttall said. The company also uses computers to improve the design of compressor blades, individually and in relation to each other.

GE likewise asserts high compression ratios. The compression ratio for the GEnx core, alone, is 23:1, Csonka said. The overall pressure ratio — from the free stream of air in front of the fan to the end of the high-pressure compressor, including both the high-pressure and low-pressure spools — is “in the 45 class,” he said.]

Additionally, none of the deniers, and please understand that chemtrail deniers are people who deny something that is true, that is the definition of denial, have been able to explain how a contrail formed in thousands of square kilometres of cloud free atmosphere, such as on a crystal clear winters day, could not be absorbed into the surrounding atmosphere and disappear from view as the humidity is demonstrably lower than that of the initial contrail. As far as the physics of the matter are concerned contrails cannot spread out and become cloud. QED.

Denial is probably one of the best known defense mechanisms, used often to describe situations in which people seem unable to face reality or admit an obvious truth (i.e. “He’s in denial.”). Denial is an outright refusal to admit or recognize that something has occurred or is currently occurring. Drug addicts or alcoholics often deny that they have a problem, while victims of traumatic events may deny that the event ever occurred.

Denial functions to protect the ego from things that the individual cannot cope with. While this may save us from anxiety or pain, denial also requires a substantial investment of energy. Because of this, other defenses are also used to keep these unacceptable feelings from consciousness.

In many cases, there might be overwhelming evidence that something is true, yet the person will continue to deny its existence or truth because it is too uncomfortable to face.

Denial can involve a flat out rejection of the existence of a fact or reality. In other cases, it might involve admitting that something is true, but minimizing its importance. Sometimes people will accept reality and the seriousness of the fact, but they will deny their own responsibility and instead blame other people or other outside forces.

Addiction is one of the best-known examples of denial. People who are suffering from a substance abuse problem will often flat-out deny that their behavior is problematic. In other cases, they might admit that they do use drugs or alcohol, but will claim that this substance abuse is not a problem.
It does seem that this site is still a total waste of electrons as the convener has the same denial problem.

Leonard Clampett,

there are several points worth addressing in your reply.

1. The ratio of fuel to water in kerosene combustion is 1 : 1.3, not 1 : 3.5 - again, the additional mass is contributed by the oxygen from the outside air.

2. You may not believe in the claim that civil aircraft are involved with chemtrail spraying - but countless people do. They should have a closer look at the statement from the ‘whistleblower’.

3. The jet exhaust air has the same pressure as the intake air, which equates the environment pressure. Additionally, it was heated by the combustion process, reducing the relative humidity.
So without the additional water generated by the combustion, it would have the same properties as the intake air, only drier. The pressure cycle that it went through is not relevant.

Besides, if your assumption were true and the pressure change in the jet engine was responsible for contrails, we should see them always - no plane without a contrail. Obviously not true - how would you explain that?

4. The issue of contrails in clear air has been discussed before. Even clear air is not uniform with respect to humidity and temperature. Again: look up ice supersaturation, it’s a known phenomenon in atmospheric science since the 1930s.

As to spreading contrails, they were described in weather books for over 70 years now. It all depends on the prevailing atmospheric conditions. See this interesting video showing real historic weather books for a reference.

5. Show me scientifically sound evidence (with references!) for intentional chemtrail spraying and I will be convinced. So far, there is no evidence for chemtrails - which means that the science explaining contrails is good enough.

Hmmmmmmm!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf7ori-Qxco&feature=youtu.be

Interesting video, Leonard Clampett. It illustrates several contrail effects and variations at once.

What you see there are not just engine contrails. It is very obvious that the plane enters a very humid area (indicated by the cloud) and immediately starts to create not only engine contrails - visible on the outside of the wings - but also aerodynamic contrails created by the pressure change on the inner wing surface.

This can happen in very humid air. Google “aerodynamic contrails” images for countless examples.

A notable effect is that the engine contrails are forming considerably later than the aerodynamic trails, indicated by a large gap between engine and evolving trail. Remember that the exhaust from the engine is hot and needs some time to cool after leaving the engine. As opposed to the air that is streaming around the wings.

The article following my comment is from http://www.truthnews.com.au chemtrails segment titled “CONTRAIL SCIENCE which I can only describe as JUNK SCIENCE. This forum gets funnier by the day, or at least by the intervals of time wherein I come back to look for new jokes. I am, as is written here, ANY PILOT, as described by the author of the “CONTRAIL SCIENCE” segment below, and also an aircraft maintenance engineer, retired. I am somewhat amused by the glider pilot, JOSH ANONYMOUS who makes feeble attempts to “correct” what I have written every now and then, but then I suppose there is always room for even more humour.
For those who obviously do not understand the mechanics of contrails, I offer the following for consideration. As is known, one tonne of fuel cannot be magically converted to 1.5 or 3.5 tonnes of water, or whatever the magic figures are that are bandied about. The water that is produced in the creation of power/thrust from turbine engine combustion, both jet and propeller types at altitude, is a clear-cut matter. The fuel that is burned CONTRIBUTES to the formation of the resultant water droplets that are borne (past participle of bear) of the combustion process and pass into the freezing air behind the aircraft to be rapidly condensed and form a contrail (condensation trail).
To believe that an aircraft carries aloft water, in its fuel supply, sufficient to produce more than the weight of the fuel on board at take-off is simply nonsensical. To understand how the water is “produced” we need look no further than an example. On a clear blue winter day, with not a cloud in the sky, with ambient conditions (humidity, temperature, wind) in the suitable range, we note that a Boeing 747 burns about (approximately) 10 tonnes/hour of fuel (aviation kerosene) in cruise (4 engines) and we consider Pratt and Whitney JT-9 engines. The amount of air that is compressed and goes through the engines (4) in one second is approximately 2,832 cubic metres (100,000 cubic feet). All figures approximate due to unknown variations in ambient conditions. This means that there are about 2,832 x 60 x 60 cubic metres of air through the four engines every hour at cruise. i.e. 1,019,520 cubic metres per hour. The aircraft travels at about 500 knots True Airspeed (mach .85). Consider humidity to be say50%, for an example only, it means that the air mass is not saturated so NO CLOUD can or will form. The aircraft gathers and compresses air at a rate of 2,832 cubic metres each second, passing it through its engines at a ratio of 23.4 to 1.
A relative humidity of 100% means that the air can’t hold any more water vapour. It’s totally saturated. When this occurs, it can rain if the temperature falls. In fact, the RELATIVE HUMIDITY MUST BE over 100% where clouds have formed for it to rain. The relative humidity MUST BE 100% for cloud to form and supersaturation, i.e. over 100% relative humidity must occur for rain to fall. However, at ground level where the rain lands, the relative humidity can be less than 100%. So, at 50% humidity, there is no possibility of cloud forming, and all the water in the atmospheric air that is compressed and put through the can (the annular combustion chamber) will be instantly boiled, turned to steam and passed through the can and out the exhaust. Water does not burn, it simply changes state from liquid to gas, then back to liquid after being exhausted. As the water vapour reaches the outside freezing air it is immediately condensed and is seen as a contrail which is just condensation, hence the name “condensation trail”.

Now we begin to realise that on this clear day, with no cloud about, the exhausted condensation can only cool to the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere, and the water vapour will be absorbed by the surrounding drier air. Considering that that aircraft is surrounded by many cubic kilometres of drier air, we can see that here is no chance that the condensation can cause the surrounding air to become 100% saturated and form cloud. To claim so would be to say that, as an example, we could throw a bucket of ice cubes into an Olympic swimming pool and expect the ice cubes to freeze the surrounding water, or throw a bucket of boiling water into a similar swimming pool and expect the surrounding water to boil or even at least heat a little. Sorry, but absorption into the surrounds is what controls events. If the story of enduring contrails had any legs, we would have no need to spend fortunes, as we have over many decades, with attempts to seed cloud and make rain, we would just need to fly large aeroplanes around and around through clouds, or anywhere at all and even make it rain over deserts.

The claims that contrails “spread” out and form cloud are just plain, good old-fashioned bullshit spread by ignorant people.
If anybody knows any of the laws of thermodynamics that contradict what I have written here, please proffer it as I will be fascinated to see. C P Snow made the only real sensible comment about the laws of thermodynamics when he said that the first law tells you that you can’t win, and the second tells you that you can’t even break even.

And by the way, for the information of the author of the “CONTRAIL SCIENCE” there is NO solar heating of the atmosphere, as all heat rises from the ground after the sun’s heat passes through the atmosphere to the ground.

From http://www.truthnews.com.au
CONTRAIL SCIENCE
  For a contrail to form, suitable conditions must occur immediately behind a jet engine in the expanding engine exhaust plume. A contrail will form if, as the exhaust gases cool and mix with surrounding air, the humidity becomes high enough (or, equivalently, the air temperature becomes low enough) for liquid water to condense on particles and form liquid droplets. If the local air is cold enough, these newly formed droplets then freeze and form ice particles that make up a contrail.
  Because the basic processes are very well understood, contrail formation for a given aircraft flight can be accurately predicted if atmospheric temperature and humidity conditions are known.
  After the initial formation of ice, a contrail evolves in one of two ways. If the humidity is low, the contrail will be short-lived. Newly formed ice particles will quickly evaporate. The resulting contrail will extend only a short distance behind the aircraft. If the humidity is high, the contrail will be persistent. Newly formed ice particles will continue to grow in size by taking water from the surrounding atmosphere. The resulting line-shaped contrail extends for large distances behind an aircraft. Persistent contrails can last for hours while growing to several kilometers (spelling kilometres) in width and 200 to 400 meters in height. Contrails spread because of air turbulence created by the passage of aircraft, differences in wind speed along the flight track, and possibly through effects of solar heating.
  Thus, the surrounding atmosphere’s conditions determine to a large extent whether or not a contrail will form after an aircraft’s passage, and how it evolves. Other factors that influence contrail formation include engine fuel efficiency, which affects the amount of heat and water emitted in the exhaust plume.
  - source
TNRA is informed by science and is not interested in propping up anyone’s belief systems, and we don’t apologise for that.
But, please, don’t take it from me, speak to any meteorologist or ANY PILOT and they’ll tell you straight, that there is HUGE variation in the length and persistence of contrails. Sometimes they don’t form at all, other times they form, but dissipate quickly, other times they persist and spread out.
That’s the facts folks, and it’s been that way since planes first went up in the sky.
If you believe otherwise, I’m afraid you’ve been conned.
Forgive me if I seem rude or impatient on this topic, but every few months I come across a new wave of people who have been subjected to the same false propaganda about chemtrails, and I have to run the same arguments and cite the same articles over and over again. It does wear one’s patience down.
Before making some kind of angry reply, I urge you to read this article and associated links. It’s fairly detailed, and deals with most of the usual claims made by chemtrail alarmists.
Finally, let me qualify all this by saying that I do not doubt that geo-engineering programs exist, and that, indeed, some of the patented techniques discussed at international forums include the creation of artificial cirrus cloud. Does this, however, entitle you to conclude that every spreading contrail you see is an example of such geo-engineering? Think about it. (I have - LEONARD CLAMPETT)

Hi Josh.
FYI. I don’t have time for a debate. I’m just supplying information for your perusal.  I’m a farmer in the South Burnett. I’ve been watching the skies all my life because my existence depends on the rate of precipitation. Too much or too little is a problem.
I have been watching the development of what we call chemtrails for at least 25 years. My research tells me that they have many nasty uses and are an integral part of geoengineering which you should also check out.
We have minimal jet, and air, traffic here except for when rain is imminent. At those times, depending on the likely amount of precipitation, we get numerous jets spewing out chemtrails that expand to many times the size of what leaves the exhaust of planes. (The few times we get a passenger plane there is either no contrail or one that disperses within a minute. ) Some days there are numerous planes spewing out the stuff: 2 and 3 at a time in some instances. Recently there were so many that the sky turned metallic grey and the sun was obscured to such a point that even the unenlightened were asking what on earth was going on. The metallic grey and sun phenomenon were observed from Gympie to Biggenden.
We had a flood in the early part of last year. The next rain of any use at all was in March this year. I thought it strange that it was just the right time to get farmers in the planting mood at just the right time. My suspicions were correct: no useful follow up rain so many that planted have already realised they wasted borrowed capital.
Believe what you wish but if this rot is not stopped more and more farmers will crash and burn. The general populace will be next.
Regards
Cris

What a Disgrace all these Zionists and Freemasons liars here trying to deny chemtrails ,Hey Clowns your game is up no matter how much you lie we know the truth ,you ‘Persons’ are blatant liars and also traitors . The only ignorants are the ones that believe your disgusting lies The ADF are traitors and liars , Chemtrails and Geo-Engineering are 100% real the Government of Australia the commonwealth of Australia are total frauds and operate with ‘No Basis In Law” when will the dumbed down aussies wake up that even Fluoride is Poison ,let alone the Toxic filth that is loaded into drums inside the plane where seats would normally be ,and then via a sophisticated array of piping and nozzles ,sprayed all over the dumb Goyim ,they even turn it off when they have passed over the towns involved .so don’t give me your filthy lies and say it’s Contrails when we know they are CHEMTRAILS .

Leonard Clampett,
two points that you missed:

1. Relative humidity with respect to water is different from relative humidity with respect to ice.
Ice supersaturation - which is necessary for persistent contrail formation - sets in at less that 70 % RH (w.r. to water), if the temperature is at or below -40°C.

See page 3 in this paper:
http://www.mbw.ch/papers/RH_WMO.pdf

2. One ton of kerosene generates 1.3 tonnes of water - coming out of the jet engine as invisible vapor.
There is no magic required, the chemical process called “combustion” is sufficient.

Nobody claimed that planes carry water. The hydrogen is part of the kerosene molecules (which crack up during combustion), the oxygen comes from outside air. The chemical reaction creates water from both.

I’m truly at a loss why you won’t accept this. Ask the chemistry teacher of your kids or grandkids. Ask ANYONE who has some sound chemistry knowledge.