Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Latest LIVE show

Hereward Fenton

June 20, 2015
In the wake of the horrific mass shooting of black church goers in South Carolina it has begun to appear as if America may be sliding into a new phase… Get the podcast »

Listen Live or Call In !

Recent News & Podcasts

Mike Rudin (BBC Conspiracy Files) on the defensive again

24 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Mike Rudin

21 Oct 08, 11:54 AM

I've just been sent a video on the net which accuses me of being "Eurotrash" and of producing a "hit piece" about 9/11.

World Trade Center

Almost inevitably I've been enmeshed in the ever growing net of the conspiracy theory. They've added my name to a long list of imagined conspirators - the secret services, police, people who worked in the building, first responders, the fire service, city officials...and also those who they think have deliberately set out to cover up this huge conspiracy - the official investigators, the world's media...

Last month we were in New York to film the seventh anniversary of 9/11 at Ground Zero for a new programme about the allegation of a conspiracy to deliberately destroy the three skyscrapers at the World Trade Centre. "The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Truth Behind The Third Tower" is to be broadcast at 9pm on BBC Two on Sunday 26th October 2008.

We also filmed self-styled truthers who think 9/11 was an inside job, either carried out or allowed by the US government; and they needed to destroy a third tower at the World Trade Center, Tower 7, which they think contained the plans for the plot.

It is a fact that Tower 7 had some interesting tenants - the CIA, the Secret Service, the Department of Defense and the Office of Emergency Management - the very office which was intended to co-ordinate a response to a disaster or terrorist attack.

When we were filming we were surprised that some of the truthers seemed particularly keen to interview us on camera about the last programme we made about this third tower at 9/11. They think we have deliberately set out to conceal the truth. As one said to me "You already know the truth."

The group who made the video are called "We are change". They claim we misrepresented the chronology involving one important witness who we interviewed in our last programme about 9/11.

The first responder Barry Jennings was trapped inside the building for several hours along with another New York City official. They were crucial witnesses to what was going on inside Tower 7 after everyone had been evacuated shortly after the Twin Towers were hit by the two planes.

As I tried to explain to them at the time, we recorded a long interview with Barry Jennings. We also carefully considered other information and came to our own view based on all of that.

As the two men tried to get out of the skyscraper they were suddenly thrown into darkness. Barry Jennings said he heard explosions. We think it is likely that this was when Tower 1 collapsed, showering debris onto Tower 7.

We have also recently recorded an interview with the other man there, Michael Hess.

Michael Hess was Mayor Rudolf Giuliani's chief lawyer, in charge of 800 New York City lawyers. In his first interview since 9/11 he confirms our timeline. Hess says all the lights went out and he felt the building shake like an earthquake and he adds that he did not hear explosions.

In his mind he thought there might have been an explosion. In the only interview he did on 9/11 he told a reporter he had "walked down to the eighth floor where there was an explosion."

But as our interview with him shows, he is now certain that he did not hear an explosion. He just assumed on the day it could have been an explosion because he had witnessed the lights going out, the staircase filling with smoke and the building shaking vigorously.

We now know, courtesy of the final official report on 9/11 [pdf link] by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, that the official investigators think that two areas of Tower 7 were badly hit when the 1,350 foot Tower 1 collapsed. Seven columns were severed on the southwest corner and they suggest debris also hit the top centre face of Tower 7.

The lead investigator of NIST told me that "it's likely that all of those huge failures and damage really caused noises that were incredibly loud."

If our timeline is wrong then why didn't Barry Jennings and Michael Hess see and hear the moment of impact when Tower 1 fell. It must have been very loud.

The group also criticizes us for not including one sentence from an interview with the owner Larry Silverstein. Apologies now because this gets very complicated. However, some people think hidden in this is a vital clue that can unravel the biggest conspiracy in modern times.

The theory is that the owner Larry Silverstein is meant to have implicated himself in a conspiracy to destroy the buildings he owned and leased at the World Trade Center. And what exactly did he say that supposedly gave it all away?

He said "pull it" which some people interpret as an order to demolish the building.

The interview was conducted the year after 9/11 and Larry Silverstein said:

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it."

"We are change" activists think there is something sinister in the fact that we did not include an extra sentence when Larry Silverstein said:

"And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

I don't have a problem talking about it. And just for the avoidance of any doubt we included it in the Worldwide version and we will include it in the new programme for BBC Two.

However, I do not understand how that implicates the owner in any wrongdoing. Interestingly one prominent website, 9/11 Research which is highly critical of the official explanation, is not convinced either and thinks it might even be "bait" to discredit the truth movement.

The crucial words seem to be "pull it" and Larry Silverstein's spokesman provides an explanation:

"Mr Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those fire fighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building."

I talked to the man who assumed command of the New York Fire Department that day. Chief Daniel Nigro told me that it was his decision to decide what to do about Tower 7.

In other words there is no way Larry Silverstein could have ordered the fire department to leave the building and wait for it to be demolished. As Chief Nigro told me the fire service was not part of conspiracy, they were doing their job:

"When we are in charge of a building, we are in charge and that decision will be the fire chiefs and his alone...That's why I know there is no conspiracy, because for me to be part of that would be obscene and it disgusts me to even think of it."

For good measure the truthers at Ground Zero added one final criticism, saying that the BBC is funded by General Electric. I'm not sure what that's based on, but I can say with absolute, yes absolute certainty, it isn't...nor have I ever been part of a conspiracy to cover up what really went on 9/11.

Mike Rudin is series producer, The Conspiracy Files

The Barry Jennings Files - A Summary

20 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

This video presents some of the key evidence (including interviews) raised by WTC7 witness and whistle blower Barry Jennings, who died at the age of 53, just days before the NIST report on Building 7 was released.

Jennings had appeared in a BBC documentary on Building 7 which was aired in July 2008.

Read the full report here.

Sydney 9-11 Truth Action - 11 Oct 2008

14 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Thanks to Maria for the video shoot.

We had an excellent day talking and sharing information with the people of Sydney. I highly recommend getting involved in this kind of activity to anyone who feels overwhelmed, frustrated and powerless in our current situation.

Remember, we still have the right to protest.

This is an amazing opportunity which is not available to people in many other parts of the world. We need to make maximum use of that opportunity now.

I guarantee that you will feel better about yourself and the world each time you make the effort to inform new people about 9/11 and the NWO.

Scott Ritter Supports a New Investigation

14 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Scott Ritter - 19 Jan 2008 - at the Oriental Theater in Denver. Talking to on the Bush admin's vision for the mid-east and 9-11 truth.

Naomi Wolf: American people must rise up “in the millions”  to overthrow the corrupt regime

07 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Interview with Naomi Wolf author of "Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries" given October 4, 2008 on Mind Over Matters, KEXP 90.3 FM Seattle.

For more information, visit:

In this talk Naomi Wolf hilights the grave threats to freedom in America, which she says have advanced by several steps towards full blown fascism since she published "The End Of America" last year. The Bush/Cheney cabal has launched a coup, and according to Wolf there is little time left to rescue democracy.

She is effectively calling for insurrection. She is also calling on D.A.'s around the country to arrest the heads of government on charges of high treason.

According to Wolf, members of congress last week were warned that failure to approve the 700 billion "bail out" bill would lead to economic collapse and the imposition of martial law within days. This coupled with the recent deployment of troops on American soil for "crowd control" measures, indicates that a totalitarian power shift has already taken place.

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth break the 500 barrier

07 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

As of today there are 501 signatories to this petition initiated by Richard Gage, founder of


Please Take Notice That:

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.

Cynthia McKinney exposes crimes against humanity committed in New Orleans

05 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

This is truly one of the scariest stories I've come across, and the bar has already been raised pretty high on scariness.

On 29th September 2008, former congress woman and leader of the US Greens, Cynthia Mckinney, made the astonishing claim, based on reliable inside information, that as many as 5,000 human beings were shot in the head then secretly dumped in swamps in Louisiana, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The burials were organised by the Department of Defence, and the data about those killed was entered into a Pentagon computer.

Those who participated in the burial of the bodies were sworn to secrecy.

From Oped News
1 October 2008

... McKinney not only relates what an informant has reported to her, but states that insiders in the Red Cross have confirmed to her that it is true. If this is indeed true, and I regretfully believe it, based on what I have heard and read (see below), then this is a damnable crime of massive proportions, in a word, a massacre of Americans, and must be brought to light.

Georgianne Nienaber, who has written for OpEdNews on the subject of extrajudicial slayings previously, booached this ghoulish topic in an article entitled Baghdad on the Bayou: Disaster Capitalism and the War on Equality, dated Dec 3, 2007. Here are some excerpts from this article, which was based on an interview with Cajun Blues artist Tab Benoit. In it Benoit is claiming that there were many more people slain by the authorities and Blackwater than is being told. In fact, he is alleging that Blackwater was blowing people (read Blacks basically) away left and right. Check out these quotes from Benoit, but first let me emphasize that this was written well beofre McKinney's above remarks and is in no way an endorsement of McKinney. The two peices stand apart in focus:

"This Katrina thing was handled as if it would have been Iraq. It was handled in a military way for resources; resources were the main focus, and the only difference is that the hurricane scattered people instead of bombs. There were people getting shot, there were bodies everywhere, there was destruction everywhere, and there's oil coming out of the ground like it never has before. Remind you of something else? The only difference is that we didn't have the equipment and the ability to fight back."

    "As soon as Homeland Security took over FEMA, people down here started paying attention. I can't say people in New Orleans were because they never had to deal with FEMA. Down here we flood every three or four years from a storm event. But New Orleans doesn't flood as often, you know, when we hear Homeland Security took over FEMA, it's like "Oh my god-now what?"

    "So I really started paying attention to things and how things were run. When Homeland Security is running it, that's a whole different agenda. It has nothing to do with rescuing people. Homeland Security is not a rescue operation.

    "I did an interview with more than one person from another country. One in particular was a guy from Canada... we [FEMA] had ordered 20,000 more body bags after Katrina, from Canada. Somebody was investigating. And because they were saying 1300 people died, and we had 20,000 body bags in New Orleans and they ran out, and had to reorder another 20,000 body bags." (2)

    Blackwater, Terrorism and Casualty Counts

    "They found out that Blackwater was killing people. Blackwater was just in there eradicating. If you didn't make it past the checkpoint and got to the dome or the convention center, or the bridge, or whatever, you were fair game.

    "They were claiming that they would deputize to confiscate guns. But they were told to shoot whenever they felt like it." (3)

    "Everybody here knows that there are more than 1300 people dead. Everybody that actually got into the city and was trying to help, saw bodies floating, saw bullet wounds. The coroner knows what's going on, and he ain't talking. But he knows. Because I know for a fact from some other sources that he was saying to somebody, probably on a private level, that those bullet wounds were military or highly powerful wounds. [Our investigation noted the same reports from multiple, unrelated sources.]

    Those were not 22 caliber pistols. Or 9-millimeter pistols. Let's face it; criminals want to save their lives too, in a situation like that. It's not some free-for-all. People are trying to get the hell out of there."

    Mass[ive] Media Cover-Up

    "The way it was portrayed [by media] was totally wrong. And from what I hear from outside of this country, which really is embarrassing to me, is that our media doesn't touch the stuff. I did an interview with a guy and he was blown away every time he opens a new door, it's a whole other big story that nobody is covering. He said that this thing is like the ten-headed snake. You grab one head and the other one is ready to bite you.

    "There is a story trying to go out on the Associated Press right now about oil and how that is why we're in the situation we're in right now, and the guy has submitted it, ready to go, and it's really a huge step, but it hasn't been out yet. This has been over a month that it's been submitted and it hasn't been out on the wire, so, is he gonna print it? That's a whole different thing. At least someone is willing to listen.

    "This Katrina thing was handled as if it would have been Iraq. It was handled in a military way for resources, resources were the main focus, and the only difference is that the hurricane scattered people instead of bombs. There were people getting shot, there were bodies everywhere, there was destruction everywhere, and there's oil coming out of the ground like it never has before. Remind you of something else? The only difference is that we didn't have the equipment and the ability to fight back. We didn't have suicide bombers and the things that other people have.

    "You get knocked out, and then you get killed. Look how easy this was to do. All the peoples' records were wiped out. Their city hall, their courthouses, their medical records, and their hospitals-all of that is gone. How easy is it to start taking people out at that point? That's the easiest thing in the world to be able to do.

    "You hide it from the media, you keep the media focused on the [super] dome and the convention center, and you keep giving opinionated stories about what this picture is, and then you pull the wool over everybody's eyes. I don't know what we're doing outside of this country, but I know what I saw right here."


    (2) Reports of as many as 70,000 body bags have been published, but have since vanished from Internet archives. In September 2005, the Modesto, California Bee and the AP reported, "The federal government is trying to purchase an additional 50,000 body bags for use in the Hurricane Katrina cleanup and in Iraq,” according to John Hassapakis, manager of Central Valley Professional Services in Modesto. "Those were sent directly to New Orleans." Previously, the Federal Emergency Management Administration purchased 25,000 body bags and shipped them to New Orleans.

    (3) George W. Bush instituted a “zero tolerance” for looting in the aftermath of the flood, even if someone was “looting” “food or water.” Louisiana’s governor, Kathleen Blanco, added a “shoot to kill” order to Bush’s “zero tolerance” proclamation (see various media reports from BBC, ABC News, CNN et al). When National Guard troops from other states entered New Orleans five days after Katrina, troops aggressively pointed their rifles at black survivors who approached them while seeking aid (see People’s Hurricane Relief Fund The private military company Blackwater issued a press release stating they were in New Orleans: see Reporters Jeremy Scahill and Daniela Crespo quoted Blackwater operatives in September 2005: “They say they are on contract with the Department of Homeland Security and have been given the authority to use lethal force” (

    Again, the full article, part of a series, is at

Free Energy - the open source energy movement

September 26, 2008, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

03 October 2008 | Permalink | comments: 5

TNRA show 14,

In this weeks show we talk to Ashtweth Palise, Co-Founder of the and and one of the most visible and vocal people of the Open Source Energy movement. He has worked diligently for years, tirelessly bringing us well-produced videos, presentations, and comprehensive documentation regarding free energy technology and energy-saving devices.

If you would like the Blue Print plans to make a geet converter for your self please see

Some more great links about geet are here

Please be sure to support the open scorce energy movment by subscribing to the Panacea Bocaf newsletter. This news letter holds multible functions, it gives great information and breaking news on new discoveries aswell as helps protect the open scorce engineers by exposing thier work across the world.

To sign up simply go to

Currently Panacea finds the follwing devices the best practical do now applications and creditable introductory devices in the field of "free energy" devices.

Page 87 of 110 pages ‹ First  < 85 86 87 88 89 >  Last ›

Listen Live

Recent Comments

Oh my God Josh, now I know you are just joshin’ me.

10 degrees above the horizon means absolutely nothing in regard to distance because you would be looking along a line to infinity. Your opinion here seems not likely to mean much as you were most certainly not on the spot. If the chemtrail had been at the altitude you would like it to be we would not have been able to see the detail of it which, as you should know, will never show up in a photograph except in a close-up. We were three observers. It seems that, according to the web-site you mentioned, the chemtrail could have been at any point along the infinity line at an altitude corresponding. So, could it have been at 70,000 feet? Detail does not show at distance. Did you notice that the point of the roof in the first image on the house was also at 10 degrees above the horizon and it is just across the road. Note the detail you can see there close up? The top of one tree is about 15 degrees above the horizon so is it at 40,000 feet? Triangulation requires more than single part of an equation. You must know the height (altitude) to get the distance or know the distance to find the altitude. If you knew the altitude of the aircraft why would you be calculating the distance using tan?

I thought there may be some sensible discussion here and came back for a look, but I was wrong. I suggest you could go to the following URL for some hints.

I don’t think I will be back.

“Leonard Clampett,

I have looked at your images. They are showing contrails around 10 degrees over the horizon. This does not mean that the contrails are on a low altitude level; they are on normal contrail/cirrus level, most likely above 30000 feet.

They are just quite a bit away from your position - around 35 miles according to this article:

How would a natural cirrus cloud look in that distance?

By Josh on 2012 11 29 - 18:00:24
From the entry ‘Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?’.”

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 29 - 20:04:26
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett said:

“The calculations for upper air humidity are done by weather forecasters”

Weather balloons are reporting back the dew point depending on altitude (pressure level). They show how variable the humidity can be in the atmosphere - without any visible indications.

Consider the Skew-T diagram created by the balloon launched from Brisbane airport, around the time you took the photos:

The left graph line indicates the dew point, with quite extreme jumps.

Note that these are not the conditions that your contrails met. I estimate the distance from your place to Brisbane airport to be around 7 miles. You observed them in this direction (roughly to the west), so according to my previous post their position must have been over the open sea, even beyond Moreton Island.

This is at least 25 miles from the balloon launch, and they were probably created hours before.

The problem with the balloon sounding is that they are retrieving but one single local probe in the complex and variable vastness of the atmosphere.

They can give us a glimpse of this complexity though which should caution us to trust our limited senses too far.

By Josh on 2012 11 29 - 19:34:19
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

I have looked at your images. They are showing contrails around 10 degrees over the horizon. This does not mean that the contrails are on a low altitude level; they are on normal contrail/cirrus level, most likely above 30000 feet.

They are just quite a bit away from your position - around 35 miles according to this article:

How would a natural cirrus cloud look in that distance?

By Josh on 2012 11 29 - 19:00:24
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Another note to make a point about humidity calculations. I have been asked my opinion on how to calculate humidity at, say, 30,000 feet over a wide area. Let me say that as a weather observer you need to know the wet and dry bulb temperatures for the place you want to measure. Wet and dry bulb thermometers are necessary to measure the evaporation rate at a particular place. The difference between the wet and dry bulb temperatures allow for calculation of humidity. The evaporation from the wet bulb base cools the thermometer at a calculated rate which then allows humidity to be read from a table. When the two are the same we have 100% humidity and visible moisture. The further the two are apart the drier the air. The wet bulb can only ever otherwise be lower than the dry bulb because 100% saturation equals 100% humidity. Depending upon how much water vapour is in a parcel of air according to the Mole fraction, and any further fall in temperature, we find out much water condenses out into rain and at what rate. Changes in temperature and barometric pressure will change the Dew Point.

At altitude we are dependant upon information fed back from radio Sondes sent up in hydrogen filled weather observation balloons but these only give ambient temperature and not a differing temperature as they rise too quickly to take individual samples and they show the rate of change of conditions as they rise. The calculations for upper air humidity are done by weather forecasters.

The Mole fraction of water vapour expresses the ratio of water molecules - to air and water molecules.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 29 - 18:52:25
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

The URL for the four photographs of the chemtrails over Brisbane as I took them.,UhSWN,b2mPq,fn05I#0

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 29 - 18:16:24
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Perhaps this can clear up the misunderstandings about cloud/fog and contrail formation, and one can see that the claims about “supersaturation” cannot apply to a free atmosphere because it cannot be pressurised.

The dew point is the temperature below which the water vapour in a volume of humid air at a constant barometric pressure will condense into liquid water. Condensed water is called dew when it forms on a solid surface.

The dew point is a water-to-air saturation temperature. The dew point is associated with relative humidity. A high relative humidity indicates that the dew point is closer to the current air temperature. Relative humidity of 100% indicates the dew point is equal to the current temperature and that the air is maximally saturated with water. When the dew point remains constant and temperature increases, relative humidity decreases.

General aviation pilots use dew-point data to calculate the likelihood of carburettor icing and fog, and to estimate the height of the cloud base.

At a given temperature but independent of barometric pressure, the dew point is a consequence of the absolute humidity, the mass of water per unit volume of air. If both the temperature and pressure rise, however, the dew point will rise and the relative humidity will lower accordingly. Reducing the absolute humidity without changing other variables will bring the dew point back down to its initial value. In the same way, increasing the absolute humidity after a temperature drop brings the dew point back down to its initial level. If the temperature rises in conditions of constant pressure, then the dew point will remain constant but the relative humidity will drop. For this reason, a constant relative humidity percentage with different temperatures implies that when it’s hotter, a higher fraction of the air is water vapour than when it’s cooler.

At a given barometric pressure but independent of temperature, the dew point indicates the mole fraction of water vapour in the air, or, put differently, determines the specific humidity of the air. If the pressure rises without changing this mole fraction, the dew point will rise accordingly; Reducing the mole fraction, i.e., making the air less humid, would bring the dew point back down to its initial value. In the same way, increasing the mole fraction after a pressure drop brings the relative humidity back up to its initial level. Considering New York (33 ft elevation) and Denver (5,280 ft elevation), for example, this means that if the dew point and temperature in both cities are the same, then the mass of water vapour per cubic metre of air will be the same, but the mole fraction of water vapour in the air will be greater in Denver.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 29 - 16:04:39
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett said:

“with the otherwise clear blue sky and low humidity there was no contrail (condensation trail) and most certainly no ability for a contrail to be voluminous and last for many kilometres across the sky”

I don’t think it’s possible to make that judgement just by looking.
Under the conditions of that moment, Cumulus clouds (also from condensation) were developing.

It may be possible to make a good guess about the base of Cumulus clouds because we know how they are supposed to look and because the shadows on their surface are clearly defining their shape.

The same can’t be said about Cirrus clouds or contrails, no matter the amount of experience. A contrail may seem low if it has spread considerably.
In fact, the process of spreading itself may appear like “sinking”, because size increase is associated with “coming closer” in our mind.

You said:
“nobody, neither civil or military, can operate in controlled airspace”

Except planes that have gotten permission to do so and are under ATC control. Again, you can’t tell by just looking.

By Josh on 2012 11 28 - 21:14:45
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Quite correct Josh, the temperature at 10,000 feet would have been minus 5 degrees Celsius, however with the otherwise clear blue sky and low humidity there was no contrail (condensation trail) and most certainly no ability for a contrail to be voluminous and last for many kilometres across the sky. If anybody has a photograph of a contrail at such a low altitude I would like to see it. You see, if the temperature and humidity had been ripe for a contrail, there would have already been cloud at the place the chemtrail was sprayed. The fair weather cumulus had formed where the ambient conditions were right to form cloud. I have seen chemtrails directly over Brisbane airport at about 10,000 feet at 06:00 hours on a warm summers day. No possible chance of that being a contrail.

The height of the cloud and chemtrail was calculated as by observation, as weather observers have always done and and I have always done as a weather observer and pilot with 50 years in aviation.

As for the requirement for an Airways Clearance to operate in controlled airspace in Australia Wayne, nobody, neither civil or military, can operate in controlled airspace, especially an Airfield Control Zone due to the concentration of traffic, without a clearance and there are severe penalties for intrusion without such a clearance.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 28 - 18:53:04
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

how did you measure the height of the trails? Triangulation?

Even if your height estimation was correct, your temperature estimation is not. The atmospheric lapse rate is 3° per 1000 ft., so the temperature at 10000 ft. would have been -5° Celsius.

By Josh on 2012 11 28 - 18:26:50
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

It is a pity I cannot upload photographs to this blog, as I took 4 today at midday showing two distinct chemtrails at about 10,000 feet near our home at Enoggera near Brisbane, which were about 2,000 feet above some scattered fair weather cumulus cloud which appeared to be building toward a normal afternoon storm. The ground temperature was 25 degrees Celsius which means that the temperature could only have been about 15 degrees Celsius at 10,000 feet which is nowhere near cold enough for contrails to form, especially on a hot day with otherwise almost clear skies and a relatively dry atmosphere, i.e. low humidity.

As we are within the controlled airspace of the Brisbane International Airport it is clear to me that the aircraft had to have had an Air Traffic clearance to be where they were, doing what they were doing.

Anybody who would like a copy of the photographs please advise me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) and I will happily send them on.

I ain’t joshin’ you.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 28 - 17:40:11
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.