Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

Latest LIVE show

Hereward Fenton

February 21, 2015
In March 2007 Australian David Hicks was convicted under US law on the single charge of 'providing material support for terrorism'. The successful prosecution… Get the podcast »

Listen Live or Call In !

Recent News & Podcasts

400 European truth activists march in Brussels

12 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

United for Truth - European 911 Truth Movement


Last Sunday over 400 European truth activists ignored the rain and had a non-violent march in Brussels. They gathered at 2 P.M. in front of the Berlaymont building at Schuman, Brussels. At 3 P.M. they took a walk of 4 kilometers with a stop at the US Embassy. Before the rally left, the organizers delivered a letter to the assistant to Giulietto Chiesa, Euro-MP for Italy. Under police guidance they tried to deliver a letter containing their request to start an independent and international investigation to what happened in the U.S.A. just 7 years ago. They were told that the embassy was closed and didn't accept their letter unless is was delivered by mail. There were no incidents during the protests, and the organizers were once again very positive about the collaboration with the Brussels Police.

Furthermore, the platform is endorsed by various Non Governmental Organizations like The Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt (CATMD), CODIP, ReOpen911 and ATTAC Brussels. The first Belgian political party CAP (Comité Autre Politique) joined the rally at the end.

The platform these people and organizations support is: "In solidarity with the American citizens, we demand an independent investigation of the 9/11 attacks, which were the pretext for too many wars, lies, and a serious decrease of (y)our civil rights ("anti-terrorist"-acts, secret prisons, "Patriot act", etc). We want European troops back home! We want European laws that guarantee neutrality of the internet and that explicitly forbid tracing/chipping (RFID) of human beings as well as other electronic threats on our freedom. We want democratic and public control of financial organizations (IMF, WB, etc) and the mass media. But most of all we want to get our life back."

United for Truth made its first public appearance in September 2007. They organized the first European protest in Brussels calling to support a majority of the American people, who want a re-investigation of the 9/11 attacks. This protest is coordinated by two Belgian artists; a 25 year old Dutch speaking producer who associated with a 41 year old French speaking percussionist.

English & Dutch: Julez Edward, +32 479 936 236
French & Spanish: Olivier Galand, +32 477 257 255

Protest Outside ABC Studio - 11 September 2008

10 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

The Sydney Truth Action group will be staging a protest outside ABC studios in Ultimo on Thursday, 11 September from 11:00 AM - 01:00 PM (see map).

ABC Studios Ultimo

This is a great opportunity to make a difference, and let our (taxpayer funded) national broadcaster know we require that they exercise due diligence in covering matters of grave public concern such as 9/11.

According to a recent report, Australia currently has 1080 troops deployed in Afghanistan, yet neither the Taliban leaders nor Osama bin Laden have ever been indicted for the terrorist attacks on 9/11!

We have been misled into a conflict which has no basis in international law.

9/11 was never properly investigated.

Can we continue to allow our fellow Australians to kill and to die for a lie? 

Voice your concern and join us in protest on 11 September.

Four Corners forum discusses “The Third Tower”

10 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Last Night ABC TV (Australia) aired the BBC documentary The Third Tower, which purports to be an objective investigation into "conspiracy theories swirling over 9/11".

This morning there a number of discussion topics on the Four Corners website dedicated to the topic, and from a quick look it is clear once again, as was demonstrated when ABC Unleashed published a short  opinion piece on 9/11 unanswered questions, that the public is simply not satisfied with the level of journalistic integrity evidenced by the major media.


Last night's programme on World Trade Centre 7 was neither, “Investigative" nor "Journalism". It was just a rerun of a BBC programme that left major questions unanswered. I expected more from my ABC. If this is your measure of the qualities to which you apparently hold yourselves to, then everything that you show from this point on has no credibility.

There is so much more that needs to be explained here.

- Mark

Read more here.


All systems go for the Trilogy of Truth starting this Thursday

09 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Tonight we visited the Tom Mann Theatre in Surry Hills, to prepare and plan for the trilogy of truth starting this Thursday, 11 September - at 7pm.

The detailed program can be found on this page.

Be there or be square!


Tom Mann Theatre

Amy Goodman is arrested and cuffed

05 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Democracy Now presenter Amy Goodman has been arrested and charged with obstructing legal process, and two other DN staff are under arrest pending felony P.C. (probable cause) riot charges.

Goodman was arrested while questioning police about the unlawful detention of Democracy Now producers Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar who were arrested while they carried out their journalistic duties in covering street demonstrations at the Republican National Convention.

In the video you can see Amy being cuffed and led away by riot police.

Please visit Democracy Now for more information on this breaking story.

Democracy Now are asking all concerned members of the public to contact the Ramsey County Attorney's Office and to demand that they not press charges against Kouddous and Salazar.

Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner
RCA at (cc: dropthecharges at

Susan Gaertner for Governor
info at (cc: dropthecharges at
(612) 978-8625

Note: Be sure to cc: on all emails so that DN can deliver print outs of your messages to the St. Paul City Attorney and Ramsey County Attorney offices.

Jesse Ventura - Man of Truth

04 September 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Jesse Ventura

We present two recent video clips featuring former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura. He is one of the most important voices for 9/11 Truth today. It is especially encouraging to see a man with such  impeccable credentials clearly advocating the most important arguments in favour of a new investigation of 9/11.

This man cannot be ignored or ridiculed. This is the core of the movement. This will bring change.

Jesse Ventura (born July 15, 1951 as James George Janos), also known as "The Body", "The Star", and "The Governing Body", is an American politician, retired professional wrestler, Navy UDT veteran, actor, and former radio and television talk show host. He was inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame in 2004. He is also a former co-holder of the AWA World tag team title with Adrian Adonis.

In the Minnesota gubernatorial election of 1998, running as an Independent and member of the Reform Party, he was elected the 38th Governor of Minnesota and served from January 4, 1999 to January 6, 2003 without seeking a second term.



America is on the Brink of Fascism! Jesse Ventura


 Jesse Ventura Speaks About 9/11 at Ron Paul Rally (9/2/08)

TNRA 29 August 2008

August 29, 2008, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

31 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 4

Categories: [ ]

Tonight we bring you a TNRA exclusive on vaccination and the big brother state.

Last week it was reported in the major media that a Sydney family was on the run from The Department of Community Services and the Police after the Supreme Court issued an order for the the forcible Hep B vaccination of their new-born child.

On the show we have Meryl Dorey, spokesperson for the Australian Vaccination Network. Meryl is currently trying to help the fugitive couple to find legal represention.

Meryl Dorey is a mother of 4 children aged between 12 and 19 years. Her eldest child had several severe reactions to his vaccinations – events which started her on the path to investigating this issue more thoroughly. Through more than 18 years of exhaustive research in medical journals and medical texts, Meryl has come to the conclusion that for a certain proportion of the population, the benefits of vaccination do not outweigh the risks.

In 1994, Meryl combined her energies with a group of parents and health professionals to form the Australian Vaccination Network. The AVN has continued ever since and is dedicated to:

  • ensuring that information on the risks and ineffectiveness of vaccines if made available to anyone seeing it;

  • making sure that vaccination is never made compulsory;

  • pushing for independent peer-reviewed research of vaccination including double-blind studies which have never yet been done.

More Links for tonight's show

Australian Vaccination Network

Compulsory Vaccination - It's here!

Parents on the run with baby after refusing vaccination

Sydney Morning Herald
Kate Benson Medical Reporter
August 23, 2008

A SYDNEY couple was on the run with their two-day-old baby last night after the Department of Community Services took out a Supreme Court order to have the boy vaccinated against hepatitis B.

Sydney parents under vaccination court order were threatened with arrest by hospital staff

The Australian
August 23 2008

A SYDNEY couple are in hiding after the Department of Community Services (DoCS) took out a court order to have their three-day-old boy vaccinated against hepatitis B.

Please contact Meryl Dorey at for more information about vaccination and your rights.

Thanks for listening!

Hereward & Josh

‘9/11 Truth’ activists march through Denver

29 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

08/27/2008 @ 10:39 am
Filed by Nick Juliano

911 Truth Protest, Denver August 2008DENVER -- Around 100 activists convinced that the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 were perpetrated by dark and mysterious actors within the US government marched across the city Tuesday in a sanctioned protest that resulted in no confrontations with police.

Members of the so-called "9/11 Truth" movement gathered outside Denver's city hall proceeding to snake through cordoned off streets towards the Pepsi Center, where the Democratic National Convention is being held this week. Radio host Alex Jones, who runs the conspiracy theory Web site and is a leader of the movement led demonstrators in chants of "9/11 was and inside job" and "Down with the New World Order."

Denver police on bicycles preceded the marchers through an empty street just outside of downtown. Few Democratic delegates saw the protesters as they marched -- a goal the parade route seemed designed to achieve.

Along with the activists, the march included a mock parade float. Labeled "God's Gitmo," it displayed protesters wearing masks depicting George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, John McCain and Barack Obama locked up behind a chain-link fence.

The march never got very close to the Pepsi Center itelf, which was surrounded by a security perimeter more than two blocks from the main entrance, but it did snake past a back entrance to the security perimeter around 2 p.m., when a scattering of delegates, reporters and other guests were arriving to the convention.

Stopping outside the gates, Jones and the marchers outlined their view that the 9/11 attacks were a "false flag" operation carried out by the US government for the sake of starting wars in the Middle East. At least a dozen police in riot gear stood guard near the outer entrance to the convention site, but the protesters had no intention of causing trouble. They moved on after about 15 minutes.

"That was the most organized anarchy I've ever seen," remarked one woman standing inside the security fences.

Moving on from the convention site entrance, the protesters decided to break up their march rather than continue into the designated free speech zone tucked off a corner of the convention site. The area's been dubbed the "freedom cage" by activists in town to protest the conventions.

The demonstrators reconvened near Denver's union station later Tuesday afternoon and set up behind the MSNBC set that had been erected nearby. They waved signs and chanted while Hardball was broadcast.

The show's host seemed at best bemused by the display. At one point during a commercial break, Matthews stepped to the edge of the set and seemed to taunt the demonstrators, making a "you're crazy" gesture circling his finger around his ear.

Page 88 of 109 pages ‹ First  < 86 87 88 89 90 >  Last ›

Listen Live

Recent Comments

Leonard Clampett said:

“The so called ‘super-saturation’ ...” [...] “Can’t exist.”

If you are looking for scientific papers about supersaturation, Google estimates “about 150000” to choose from:

Searching for books returns 59,400 results:

A lot of them are hard-to-read specialist material, but some try to actually explain the phenomenon, like this one:;=false

In relation to your beer glass analogy: supersaturation in the atmosphere is happening because there is no beer glass - no surface for condensation.

By Josh on 2012 11 11 - 19:13:32
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

As an admin on this site, I wish to apologise for the way in which this thread has been taken over by people who think childish insults and out of context quotes are a clever way of advancing an argument.

Unfortunately, the parties concerned have previously evaded my attempts at banning by spoofing IP addresses.

I refuse to engage in any further dialogue with those concerned. I recommend they stop posting here as they are not welcome.

I will try once again to block the offending IP addresses.

By Hereward Fenton on 2012 11 11 - 18:53:25
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

For those who believe Wikipedia, which I think is about as useful for scientific argument as is an ashtray on a Boeing 747 wingtip, please go to meteorological textbooks, and study up on the immutable laws of thermodynamics, and apply “dew point”. Dew point is the temperature at which saturated air suffers condensation of its moisture content. That is, the moisture condenses out of the air into “visible moisture” i.e. cloud/fog. This occurs at 100% humidity. The so called “super-saturation” is about as clever as saying over-saturation or very high saturation or ultra high saturation, none of which exist. That kind of language is the same as used by people who talk about giving more than 100%. Can’t happen. The maximum effort you can give is 100%. Anything else is Hollywood poetic licence. Read any aviation weather report or forecast and you will see FZL which is aviation speak for freezing level. In Australia this is mostly given in Flight Levels, which are altitudes above 11,000 feet above the International Standard Atmosphere altimeter setting of 1013.2 millibars or 29.92 inches of mercury or what ever other measurements are used/chosen. In winter in the southern climes FZL may be seen down around 8,000 feet above mean sea level. Last summer at 6 o’clock in the morning I noted a chemtrail across Brisbane airport laid from the east and directly overhead our house. It had not long been laid and was voluminous and expanding and was at around 10,000 feet. It was only just above a layer of scattered fair weather cumulus cloud.  FZL at that time was well above 20,000 feet.
I am not here to alter anybody’s beliefs, just would like to get to the bottom of what is being sprayed.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 11 - 16:09:25
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Meagain said:

“type in the word RARE - and hit enter until you find the relevant quote”

The word is there, exactly once. Here is the context from the paper:

The second variable is known as the Hanssen-Kuipers discriminant or the true skill statistic (HKD) (Wilks, 1995). The HKD is calculated as (ad - bc) / [(a + c)(b + d)]. This measure of forecasting skill measures the skill of the “yes” and “no” forecasts of contrail occurrence equally, regardless of the relative numbers of each forecast. Gandin and Murphy (1992) show that HKD is the only equitable skill score for a two-event (i.e., yes-or-no) forecast, and thus accounts for the tendency of a “no” contrail occurrence forecast being more likely to be correct than a “yes” because persistent contrail occurrence is relatively rare.

As far as I understand this, it’s about a weighting formula as part of a model for prediction of persistant contrail conditions.

There is no quantitative statement though, as this is obviously not the focus of the paper. So “relatively rare” can be anything. I’d say if five percent of all contrails are persistent, they are relatively rare.
Considering the amount of air traffic worldwide, the absolute number is still large.

As the measurements of Immler et al. have shown (see the paper linked before, “Cirrus, contrails, and ice supersaturated regions in high pressure systems at northern mid latitudes”), there can be local peak zones and periods, particularly during stable high pressure conditions. This would match parts of Australia, I think.

By Josh on 2012 11 11 - 07:29:54
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

(continued from preceding post)

Last week the meteorologist Scott Stevens created a minor sensation in the alternative media through his accusations that hurricane Sandy had been caused by geoengineering.  In fact anyone who wants to can see the Tesla Tech Array infrasonic undulations from the satellite tracking that show how Sandy was steered out of the mid-ocean to destroy all of the northern part of the USA’s Atlantic seaboard.  The only question is not whether it happened, but why it happened: to influence the Presidential election result, to promote economic revival through reconstruction of destroyed cities, or simply to enrich certain criminal individuals. These are some of the questions that the economist Dimitris Kazakis began to examine on the first of our Enouranois videos.

Chemtrails do not serve a single purpose, of increasing albedo, cooling the planet or whatever. They also serve the purpose of increasing the conductivity of the atmosphere to facilitate the operations of Alaskan ionospheric heater HAARP, and the similar smaller installations that exist in other countries. HAARP was the subject of a report in the European Parliament in 1998, the work of the Swedish anti-nuclear campaigner Maj Britt Theorin.  Mrs Theorin’s report is entitled “On the Environment, Security and Foreign Policy”. It describes HAARP as “weapons system which disrupts the climate” and concludes that “by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment it is a global concern. Its legal, ecological and ethical implications must be examined by an international independent body before any further research and testing.”

The European Commission said that it could not act on the report or try to implement it, because the European Commission does not have authority over defence questions, which are the responsibility of NATO. There are two things to say about this: firstly this amounts to a challenge to the United States’ representation of what HAARP is, because US government says that HAARP is an ionospheric research programme, not a weapons system.  Secondly the European Commission’s acceptance of the status of not having responsibility for the defence of European citizens, and accepting that this should be entrusted to NATO. is completely intolerable. A new organization called Skyguards is at present under development, including Green activists from Sweden, Spain and Cyprus, along with other activists, and is planning to continue the work started by Mrs. Maj-Britt Theorin in 1998. When one sees phenomena such as Cyclone Sandy one can understand that Americans, as much as Europeans and the people of the rest of the planet, need this work to be continued, because they are not being defended by their own government. They are being attacked by it.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 11 10 - 22:30:01
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

It is worth tracing the different stages of the mainstream debate over aircraft emissions. This is not the debate among chemtrails activists. I am talking about the mainstream debate.  A few years ago, when Stavros Dimas was the EU’s Environmental Commissioner, the European Union introduced a policy of extending the EU’s emissions trading scheme to cover aviation, because aircraft were said to be contributing to a large and increasing extent to global greenhouse gas emissions and so to global warming. Dimas had the support of virtually all ecologists when he introduced these measures, because ecologists are virtually all on one side of the climate change debate, the side that is against the climate change skeptics. Once the scheme was introduced, the political mainstream no longer had the same need for support from the Greens and we suddenly started hearing about the corruption of climate scientists: the Climategate scandal broke out shortly before the Copenhagen Climate Summit and contributed to the ruining of that summit.  Copenhagen marked a turning point: there was a sudden rapid expansion of open public discussion of geoengineering, including proposals for solar radiation management. Paradoxically the task of promoting geoengineering schemes for dealing with global warming was left very largely to the climate change skeptics, who in the previous phase had been denying that there was a problem of anthropogenic global warming. Publicity videos began to appear, including one well-known one from the BBC, arguing for the idea that contrail cirrus from aircraft emissions played a valuable role in cooling the planet. So now, by implication, the public was being called simultaneously to support two contradictory proposals: that there should be financial incentives to encourage airlines to reduce emissions to slow global warming, and also that it would be good for airlines to increase emissions to spread contrail cirrus and slow global warming by having not fewer but MORE aircraft in the sky.
So both sides of the climate change debate have been instrumentalized and exploited, both the skeptics and the ecologists, and the result is that geoengineering is going from strength to strength and acquiring something like respectability, as a publicly admitted proposal. This is without even going into the question of chemtrails and the evident fact that while deliberate large-scale spraying is not being admitted by any government, it is obviously a well-established planetary reality, even if it is being represented as something that is not deliberate and not any different from the situation in the past, except that more aircraft are now flying.
Ecological organizations which twenty years ago would not have taken the risk of recommending geoengineering or identifying themselves with geoengineering are now beginning to do so.  A publicity poster from the WWF in Switzerland is a case in point. Acceptance of geoengineering by the WWF runs counter to the moratorium on large scale geoengineering projects passed at Nagoya in Japan in 2010 at the Conference on Biodiversity. The moratorium is not being implemented and that is what the WWF should be publicizing. It should not be suggesting that there can be any tolerance by the citizens of this planet of the global spraying of toxic aerosols in the name of dealing with climate change. For a start the climate change skeptics, who deny that there is a problem of anthropogenic global warming, should be challenged on their attitude to geoengineering.  If there is no problem, how can the skeptics accept the so-called “solution” of geoengineering?  The fact that the two sides of the climate change debate have spent the last twenty years arguing with each other about climate change while never talking about geoengineering, and even saying that people who do talk about geoengineering are conspiracy theorists, is something that has to stop.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 11 10 - 22:27:52
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

“Never underestimate the damage that can be done by just a small number of men, with evil intent and unlimited resources.”
This is a good starting point for the discussion. The first question that could be asked is “How do we know the intent of this small number of men is evil?” The simple, in fact too simple, answer is that virtually everything that comes out of nuclear weapons laboratories is evil, and the clandestine global spraying of toxic aerosols that is being justified, by insinuation, under the title of “geoengineering” is an idea that comes very largely from American nuclear weapons laboratories.  Edward Teller, who popularized the geoengineering proposal in 1997 with a short article entitled “The Planet Needs A Sunscreen”, made his name as the father of the hydrogen bomb and of Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” proposal for an anti-missile shield. He says that he borrowed the idea from the physicist Freeman Dyson, who was likewise one of the team working on the Manhattan Project that gave the world the atom bomb, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and everything that has followed.

The surest way not to understand what is happening with geoengineering is to become involved in the contrails versus chemtrails debate. Rather than debate whether chemtrails are contrails, one should point out the parallel with what happened with genetically modified food production: the corporations and their laboratories and their lobbyists decide to introduce a change, so at the same time they start a public relations campaign to deny that any change has occurred. In the case of genetic modification the key word was “substantial equivalence”. Genetically modified foods are not the same as non-genetically modified foods, chemically, nutritionally or in any other way. Sometimes they look the same. “Substantial equivalence” means that they have to be treated as if they are the same. Soon laws are introduced to make it illegal to make any distinction between them or to say that they are not the same. Something similar has happened with geoengineering: a decision was taken to change aircraft emissions and turn them from being an unwanted side-effect of flying jet aircraft into being a deliberate means for changing the temperature and the chemistry of the atmosphere. So naturally it was denied that any change had occurred. Almost fifteen years after the implementation of a massive increase in the use of climate modification on a planetary scale, people are still conducting the chemtrails versus contrails debate. This is NOT what is happening with genetic modification. Ecologists are mostly not wasting their time arguing with corporation spokespersons over whether there is substantial equivalence between genetically modified and non-genetically modified food. The same should have happened with geoengineering, and if it hasn’t happened it should happen now.
I could mention just in passing that the general strike that took place in Greece last week made it possible for us to make a distinction that is normally concealed. For three hours, between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. on Wednesday 6th November Greece’s air-traffic controllers staged a work stoppage. All “conventional” air traffic was halted and timetables were altered to take into account the stoppage. Throughout these three hours chemtrail spraying planes continued their activity undisturbed. So they are not being monitored by air-traffic control.
(to be continued)

By Wayne Hall on 2012 11 10 - 22:25:55
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett said:

“Try mixing water in a glass container with Avtur or Jet-A1 and you have a difficult job.”

The water vapour in a jet exhaust is created by combustion; it was not there before. BTW, it’s the same with AvGas and piston engines, or cars and gas.

The large fuel molecules are cracked and recombine with the oxygen from the intake air. The outgoing products are water and carbon oxydes, plus a bit of soot from incomplete combustion.

By Josh on 2012 11 10 - 21:53:33
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett said:

“The reason there is no cloud is, considering the altitude, not enough moisture in the surrounding air.”

Again, you don’t take into account supersaturation. There may be more than 100% relative humidity in the air with no immediate condensation. You could call it “a cloud waiting to happen”.

Wikipedia has a nice “daily-life” example of supersaturation:

Carbonated water is a supersaturated solution of carbon dioxide gas in water. At the elevated pressure in the bottle, more carbon dioxide can dissolve in water than at atmospheric pressure. At atmospheric pressure, the carbon dioxide gas escapes very slowly from the supersaturated liquid. This process may be accelerated by the presence of nucleation sites within the solution, such as small bubbles, caused by shaking the bottle, or another solute, such as sugar powder or a widget.

For water vapour and air, the effect is this:

In air that is supersaturated, water droplets may precipitate upon being disturbed. This can be observed in a cloud chamber. In the more general context a precipitate may form.

In a saturated environment, the ice crystals formed from the exhaust vapour of a jet engine will not sublimate and vanish, in a supersaturated environment they will grow - just like snowflakes.

By Josh on 2012 11 10 - 21:50:39
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

A further consideration on the aspects of engineering with regard to chemtrails is that of oil and water. Fuel is refined from oil. Take some crude oil and try to mix it with water. It doesn’t happen because the oil floats on top of the water. Aviation kerosene is refined from crude oil to a degree required to produce that type of fuel. Try mixing water in a glass container with Avtur or Jet-A1 and you have a difficult job. Some fuel will be mixed at first but will soon settle out to the bottom of the container.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 09 - 21:03:12
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.