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

TNRA 22 August 2008

August 22, 2008, part 1 of 1.
Download mp3 » click here

24 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 41
By Hereward Fenton

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement, NIST, WTC7 ]

On tonight's show we present in in-depth analysis of the NIST WTC 7 Investigation, with engineer and registered member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 TruthJohn Bursill.

Information relevant to tonight's show:

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

AE911Truth Press Conference 8/21/08 Response to NIST Final Report on WTC 7

NIST Press Release


Report and Recommendations for Improving Building Safety Released for Comment
August 21, 2008 | Related Documents

Shyam Sunder, NIST lead investigator

GAITHERSBURG, Md.—The fall of the 47-story World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) in New York City late in the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001, was primarily due to fires, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced today following an extensive, three-year scientific and technical building and fire safety investigation. This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building, the agency stated as it released for public comment its WTC investigation report and 13 recommendations for improving building and fire safety.

“Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse that brought the building down.”

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse

23 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html

Report and Recommendations for Improving Building Safety Released for Comment
August 21, 2008 | Related Documents 

Shyam Sunder, NIST lead investigator

GAITHERSBURG, Md.—The fall of the 47-story World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) in New York City late in the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001, was primarily due to fires, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced today following an extensive, three-year scientific and technical building and fire safety investigation. This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building, the agency stated as it released for public comment its WTC investigation report and 13 recommendations for improving building and fire safety.

“Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse that brought the building down.”

“Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7,” Sunder said. The NIST investigation team also determined that other elements of the building’s construction—namely trusses, girders and cantilever overhangs that were used to transfer loads from the building superstructure to the columns of the electric substation (over which WTC 7 was constructed) and foundation below—did not play a significant role in the collapse.

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

Video -The collapse of World Trade Center 7

Citing its one new recommendation (the other 12 are reiterated from the previously completed investigation of the World Trade Center towers, WTC 1 and 2), the NIST investigation team said that “while the partial or total collapse of a tall building due to fires is a rare event, we strongly urge building owners, operators and designers to evaluate buildings to ensure the adequate fire performance of the structural system. Of particular concern are the effects of thermal expansion in buildings with one or more of the following features: long-span floor systems, connections not designed for thermal effects, asymmetric floor framing and/or composite floor systems.” Engineers, the team said, should be able to design cost-effective fixes to address any areas of concern identified by such evaluations.

The investigators also reported that if the city water main had not been cut by the collapse of World Trade Center towers 1 and 2 (WTC 1 and WTC 2), operating sprinklers in WTC 7 would likely have prevented its collapse. “Nevertheless,” Sunder said, “we recommend that building standards and codes be strengthened beyond their current intent to achieve life safety by preventing structural collapse even during severe fires like this one, when sprinklers do not function, do not exist or are overwhelmed by fire.”

Sunder identified several existing, emerging or even anticipated capabilities that could have helped prevent WTC 7’s collapse. He cautioned that the degree to which these capabilities improve performance remains to be evaluated. Possible options for developing cost-effective fixes include:

  • More robust connections and framing systems to better resist effects of thermal expansion on the structural system.
     
    Structural systems expressly designed to prevent progressive collapse, which is the spread of local damage from a single initiating event, from element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it. Current model building codes do not require that buildings be designed to resist progressive collapse.
  • Better thermal insulation (i.e., reduced conductivity and/or increased thickness) to limit heating of structural steel and to minimize both thermal expansion and weakening effects. Insulation has been used to protect steel strength, but it could be used to maintain a lower temperature in the steel framing to limit thermal expansion.
  • Improved compartmentation in tenant areas to limit the spread of fires.
  • Thermally resistant window assemblies to limit breakage, reduce air supply and retard fire growth.

 

The 12 recommendations reiterated from the WTC towers investigation address several areas, including specific improvements to building standards, codes and practices; changes to, or the establishment of, evacuation and emergency response procedures; and research and other appropriate actions needed to help prevent future building failures.

Determining the probable collapse sequence for WTC 7, NIST found that the impact of debris from the collapse of WTC 1 ignited fires on at least 10 floors of WTC 7, and the fires burned out of control on six lower floors. The heat from these uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors. Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical interior column that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building. The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the fifth floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of the critical column. This collapse of floors left the critical column unsupported over nine stories.

“When this critical column buckled due to lack of floor supports, it was the first domino in the chain,” Sunder explained. “What followed in rapid succession was a progression of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line—involving all three interior columns on the most eastern side of the building. Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns in the core of the building failed. Finally, the entire façade collapsed.”

drawing showing locations of columns of typical WTC 7 floor

Diagram 1—Typical WTC 7 floor showing locations of columns (numbered). The buckling of Column 79 was the initiating event that led to the collapse of WTC 7. The buckling resulted from fire-induced damage to floors around Column 79, failure of the girder between Columns 44 and 79, and cascading floor failures. [Download high-res version]

The investigation team considered the possibility of other factors playing a role in the collapse of WTC 7, including the possible use of explosives, fires fed by the fuel supply tanks in and under the building, and damage from the falling debris of WTC 1.

The team said that the smallest blast event capable of crippling the critical column would have produced a “sound level of 130 to 140 decibels at a distance of half a mile,” yet no noise this loud was reported by witnesses or recorded on videos.

As for fuel fires, the team found that they could not have been sustained long enough, could not have generated sufficient heat to fail a critical column, and/or would have produced “large amounts of visible smoke” from Floors 5 and 6, which was not observed.

Finally, the report notes that “while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7.”

The investigation team found that the design of WTC 7 was generally consistent with the New York City building code in effect at the time. The estimated 4,000 occupants of WTC 7 on the morning of Sept. 11 were evacuated without any fatalities or serious injuries.

To reach the conclusions in its report, NIST complemented its in-house expertise with private-sector technical experts; accumulated an extensive collection of documents, photographs and videos related to the WTC events of 9/11; conducted first-person interviews of WTC 7 occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; and performed the most complex computer simulations ever conducted to model a building’s response behavior and determine its collapse sequence due to a combination of debris impact damage, fires and a progression of structural failures from local fire-induced damage to collapse initiation, and, ultimately, to global collapse.

NIST welcomes comments on the draft report and recommendations—available online at http://wtc.nist.gov—received by noon Eastern Daylight Time on Sept.15, 2008. Comments (instructions for submission are available at http://wtc.nist.gov) may be submitted via:

    * e-mail to wtc@nist.gov;
    * fax to (301) 869-6275; or
    * surface mail to WTC Technical Information Repository, Attn: Stephen Cauffman, NIST, 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8611, Gaithersburg, Md. 20899-8610.

The NIST investigation of WTC 7 was conducted under the National Construction Safety Team (NCST) Act, as part of its overall building and fire safety investigation of the World Trade Center disaster. The act gives NIST the responsibility for conducting fact-finding investigations of building failures that resulted in substantial loss of life or that posed significant potential of substantial loss of life. NIST has no regulatory authority under the NCST Act.

As an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, NIST promotes U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life.

NIST to Release Report and Recommendations from Investigation of World Trade Center Building 7

20 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Agency Will Hold Public Webcast on August 21
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/calmed/wtc_081808.html

NIST - National Institute of Standards and Technology

Gaithersburg, Md. -- The Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will hold a media briefing and live public webcast on Aug. 21, 2008, in Gaithersburg, Md., on the findings and recommendations from its building and fire safety investigation of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7). WTC 7 was a 47-story building that fell nearly seven hours after the World Trade Center (WTC) towers collapsed following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The NIST WTC 7 report will present the probable collapse sequence for the building and will provide recommendations for improving building and fire safety in other buildings similar to WTC 7. The draft WTC 7 investigation report released at the briefing will be open for public comment through noon Eastern Daylight Time on Sept. 15, 2008.

Shyam Sunder, director of the NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory and lead investigator for the federal building and fire safety investigation of the World Trade Center disaster, will present the report and answer questions from reporters at the briefing. The public will be able to view the briefing through a live webcast that will be accessible from NIST's WTC Web site at http://wtc.nist.gov

What: A media briefing and public webcast on the findings and recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7).
When: Thursday, Aug. 21, 2008 11 a.m. - Noon Eastern Daylight Time
Web Info : The WTC investigation Web site at http://wtc.nist.gov will contain links to the webcast as well as accompanying materials such as the full report, news release, and accompanying visuals at the time of the briefing.
Reporters: Credentialed journalists who wish to register for the media briefing should contact Ben Stein, (301) 975-3097, ben.stein@nist.gov

Video: Sydney Truth Action - 11 August 2008

19 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

11th August - a bright, crisp winter's day in Sydney.

As always the encounter with passers by was interesting, informative and very worthwhile.

For information about public events planned for September 2008, please visit this page: http://www.911oz.com/weblogid/168

Enjoy!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=sczZLSybs_s

Four Principles of Disinformation

16 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

After several years reading and studying, I have come to the realisation that there are some key principles to the art of disinformation, and that these principles need to be understood in order to ultimately defeat it.

1. Disinfo is a weapon
This is often the hardest principle to grasp and it is also the most important. Disinfo is, and always has been, a tactic used in war. When it is used in "apparent peacetime" it is still a weapon of war, for war encompasses far more than just bullets and bombs. Disinformation is indeed one of the most important tools in the military arsenal.

2. Disinfo is aimed at a designated enemy
This principle follows naturally from the first. Disinfo is rarely omni-directional or generic - in order to work at all it must have a vector. As with conventional weapons, this vector is in the direction of the group/individual designated as enemy. When directed at an individual, disinformation is often used as part of a scam - think of the Nigerian chain letter or those emails telling you that you have won the lottery.

In the case of the internet scam the goal is to rob the enemy/victim, but the basic tactic is more or less the same when conning a citizen into supporting a war based on a false flag terrorist attack, only in this case the concept of "enemy" must be expanded to include both the citizen and the perceived external enemy.

3. Disinfo succeeds by disguise.

Since disinfo is rooted in deception, it must be disguised as something other than disinfo in order to fulfill its function. Conversely, once disinfo is exposed it no longer "works" to the same degree. An example of this might be the disinfo claim that "no plane" hit the WTC on September 11.

This claim works as disinfo only to the extent that most people believe that the view is genuinely believed by those who promote it. If, by contrast, it could be proven that the "no plane" theory was concocted in by the CIA in Langley Virginia, then it would lose its effectiveness. Perhaps surprisingly, the observation that the "WTC no plane" theory is flawed does not neutralise it as disinfo, since it is quite common for people to believe things in good faith which turn out to be false. In order for the disinfo to be fully neutralised it must be exposed as a deliberate reverse propaganda operation orchestrated for the purpose of weakening a designated enemy.

4. Disinfo sews division and confusion in the enemy
As a weapon, effective disinfo has the combined effect of creating/exacerbating division and confusion in the enemy. This, of course, weakens the enemy, which is the military objective. As an example of how disinfo weakens and divides, let us return again to the "no plane hit the WTC" proposition. To start with, this proposition potentially has the effect of creating a schism within the 9/11 movement. It also has the effect of creating confusion or the perception of confusion when mixed up with the quite distinct proposition that "no plane hit the Pentagon".

The latter proposition, although controversial, is not (in the writer's opinion) to be discarded, for the simple reason that the authorites have refused to release the video which would prove their case. But, the "no plane hit the WTC" proposition unfortunately gets conflated with the "no plane hit the Pentagon" proposition, creating a fog of confusion which may lead the uneducated outsider to conclude that all alternative theories are crazy. This of course achieves the goal of weakening the enemy (ie. the people's movement seeking truth about 9/11).

I hope you found this exposition of four principles of disinformation helpful.

Hitler, the big lie and 9/11

14 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

"... in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie..."

(Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p.134)

The above quote explains many things about why the official 9/11 conspiracy theory is not investigated or questioned even by those who in other situations would sieze on any opportunity to attack the status quo.

Perhaps Hitler was merely describing how cognitive dissonance coupled with extreme violence works in the favour of power elites.

Possibly this stategy of violence + deceit exploits a deep instinctive mechanism which humans have evolved in order to preserve group cohesion: when your tribe is attacked you rally around your leader - for good or ill.

An interview with Glen Clancy (Fool Me Twice)

08 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Download mp3 » click here

On 1st August Truth News Radio Australia interviewed Glen Clancy, creator of the film Fool Me Twice, which explores evidence that the 2002 Bali Bombings were orchestrated by intelligence operatives, while the governments of Australia and Indonesia looked the other way.

During the interview we get into an interesting discussion of the physics of the explosions which devastated a large area of Kuta Beach, and the coverup of vital information such as the alteration of flight log data at Bali's International airport.

We also examine the Howard Government's willful deceptions in regard to the East Timorese independence campaign which led to many deaths, culminating in the Australian led military intervention (INTERFET) in 1999.

Glen currently lives and works in Japan, but he is planning to return to Australia soon. We look forward to his next project.

Fool Me Twice is a must see film, and you can watch the whole production for free on Google Video.

The Way of the World - Fabricating A Case For War

06 August 2008 | Permalink | comments: 0

Categories: [ 9/11 Truth Movement ]

Yet another glaring example of how criminal deception lies at the heart of the current status quo. This deception was not unique the United States. It was and is still at the heart of Australian foreign policy in relation to Iraq and Afghanistan.

The basic premise of this website is given further support each time a new whistle blower steps forth from the shadows with another expose of government high crimes and misdemeanors.

We await the final act.

From NPR: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93293353

Ron Suskind - The Way of the World

Morning Edition, August 5, 2008 ·In his new book, The Way of the World: A Story of Truth And Hope In An Age of Extremism, author Ron Suskind alleges that the Bush administration knew Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, and eventually fabricated intelligence assets to support its case for war. Both the White House and the CIA deny his claims. Steve Inskeep talks with Suskind about the book.

Page 91 of 110 pages ‹ First  < 89 90 91 92 93 >  Last ›

Listen Live

Recent Comments

“documents prove that an unsuspecting public was indeed used in chemical experiments during the 1950s and 60s.  These documents disclosed experiments of chemical spraying from airplanes over several cities including Corpus Christi, Texas and fogging disbursement of chemicals targeted at Pruit-Igoe, a low cost housing project with over 10,000 occupants in St. Louis, Missouri. The government’s cover story for the experiments was using as fog as cover against communist air attack”
http://www.policymic.com/articles/18974/more-reasons-to-distrust-government-and-the-mainstream-media

http://millvalley.patch.com/articles/photo-weird-contrails-over-mill-valley#photo-12157350

By John Doe on 2012 11 15 - 23:23:29
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

i doubt the original post was meant to provoke anything other than controversy. the blatant insulting bias was a deliberate attempt to do nothing else but generate advertising hits. ( i dont get ads.. )

this dog and pony blog struggles for relevancy and credibility with its blatant misinformation, censorship and dictatorial hypocritical nonsensical administration.. 

threatening to close the thread? lol..  you wont… youre scared!

whatcha gonna do hereward? close ALL the threads?

i appreciate the informed sensible input from different views of wayne and leonard, ive learnt a few things.. im sure if you could trust fenton with an honest vote and a poll here, the consensus would show its not unreasonable to wonder why the skies appear as they do, and to seek legitimate answers..

for myself, as a layman, i can simply call things as i see them, joshs disingenuous hall monitor annoying attitude will get from me the disrespect it deserves..

herewards censorship will result in a repeat post, which simply brings the deleted post back to prominence again.. i can play that game as long as he wants.. his pathetic threats to continue to taunt me are as laughable as this whole site having anything to do with truth.

as for cyber violence.. i appreciate that as well.. because dishonesty and blatant BS should be called out for what it is.. and for the lulz..

mike glynn… the paranoid conspiracy theorist who thinks hes going to be taken out the air by some chemtrail alarmist-thug-brownshirt-fascist-blah-blah-blah.. with what? a rocket propelled boomerang? - otherwise known as the conspiracy within a conspiracy..

does quantas know such nutters are flying their planes?

none of them can offer any proof of anything they say.. 

they will call this post insulting, and abusive, simply because im critical and disagree..

it will most likely be deleted a few times, and my ip blocked again… for the umpteenth time.. 

so be it.

By agin mee on 2012 11 15 - 22:13:19
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Wayne, you should endeavour to make your posts clear.

Your post did seem to claim that I was claiming that chemtrails were not real “on the basis of “it isn’t being done” which seemed to be saying that I did not believe chemtrails were for real. A little difficult to follow that rather bland statement. I note you have expressed that you should have expressed your point more precisely. Miscommunication causes many problems all the time. Geo-engineering can be the only reason for the chemtrails as far as I can see, and I do not believe for good purposes. The wild theories I wrote of are those unaccompanied by good science or observation.

I have never insisted that no water is produced by combustion as I have made it clear how I understand combustion causes contrails. I presume you are using produced meaning to bring forth or yield. The very evidence of the making of contrails contradicts the claims about “contrails “spreading and manufacturing cloud quite simply because if there was more water than is contained in the air passing through the engine, tonnes and tonnes from one aircraft I recall reading in one post, it would certainly create large contrails rather than the thin wispy trails we see on any winter day as the upper atmosphere rarely has greater than about 70% humidity and is therefore relatively dry. There can never be more than 100% humidity in the atmosphere anyway, so those claims of supersaturation can be sorted and tossed out early.

Exhaust emissions are the same whether at ground level or high altitude because engines are manipulated, these days by computers, to produce required power at best and optimum performance for all settings under all conditions. For those who believe that there is water produced from the actual high temperature combustion process (about 700 degrees Celsius at ITT (Inter Turbine Temperature)), that is more than is contained in the intake air, I suggest talking to engineers who run jet engine test cells and ask how much water is emitted during their testing. It would be an experiment to capture the emissions and cool them to see how much water condenses out of it. Interesting. In addition it begs the question as to why we inject water methanol into the engine intake, on some aircraft, during take-off if there is water in the fuel.

Thanks for the exchange. I will sign off now as I have not been able to see anything of worth coming from this forum and argument has never achieved anything worthwhile. Only discussion will do that.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 15 - 21:05:01
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard, I have read all your posts, though I admit to having been disoriented by your first post and your reference to “wild theories about contrails and “chemtrails” so that I did not know initially where you were coming from. I also found myself in disagreement with your later statement that civilian airliners would not or could not be implicated in spraying. My reference to your arguing on the basis of “it isn’t being done” should have been more expressed more precisely. 

What I should have said is that you don’t seem to want to talk about geoengineering, or any of the other actual or proposed applications of spraying of particulates from aircraft, unlike me, for I entered the discussion on the basis of the argument that “the last way to understand what one is seeing in the skies is to become implicated in the contrails vs chemtrails discussion”.  That, I said, is because “the purpose of the contrails vs chemtrail discussion is to determine whether geoengineering (or some other deliberate atmospheric modification) activity is in progress .  This subject has always interested me more and my focus has always been on geoengineering and the applications of particulate spraying, along with the underlying politics. Not the physical science of contrails/chemtrails, which I cannot argue about.

The discussion you wished to have was/is precisely that proposed by Hereward and Josh: i.e. whether there can be “persistent” and/or spreading controls. What you have to say on the subject of “persistent” chemtrails seems persuasive to me. But your presumed expertise has not enabled you to be any more effective than I have been in securing what should be due acknowledgement from Hereward and Josh. What has been in progress here has been a dialogue of the deaf, whoever involves themselves with it. And the final result has been the intrusion of activists threatening cyber-“violence”.

Perhaps it is these activists’ devotion to the fetish of “freedom of speech” that leaves them with no option other than anonymous threats. They are evidently not willing to say that “freedom of speech” should be drawn into question.
 

By Wayne Hall on 2012 11 15 - 20:19:11
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

I was not referring to chemtrails in my previous post. I was referring to your claim that no water is in a jet exhaust that was not there before in the intake air.

Michal Glynn, professional jet pilot, commented:

“The chemical equation given by Josh explains it all. Kerosene and ambient oxygen in=large amounts of water and CO2 out.”

See page 4 of comments, at the bottom, “2012 07 09 - 09:52:23”.
It’s obviously not my equation ...

Are you still insisting that there is no water produced by the combustion of fuel?

By Josh on 2012 11 15 - 20:06:54
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Again Josh, I did ask myself and I found that I disagree with the contention that chemtrails do not exist simply from my experience and observations over many decades of professional flying in a number of different countries and internationally. I have explained before that I doubt that commercial airline aircraft are used because as an engineer and pilot I can say without fear of intelligent dissent that engineers and pilots know their aircraft well enough to detect any extra plumbing that would have to be installed. Or at least I hope they do. I have retired from active flying but still hold my ATPL and First Class Medical Certificate for it and I still have all my faculties.

As for asking “Google” I believe that can be useful but not definitive.

“The chemistry of combustion is not a matter of opinion. Ask not just Michael Glynn, ask any professional jet pilot, chemistry teacher, atmospheric scientist. Ask Google, at least.”

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 15 - 19:28:06
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

I found that insults often tend to come up if factual arguments are running out.

ummmm… what is you FACTUAL argument that chemtrails dont exist again?

ohhhhh ... thats right.. that under certain rae circumstances when conditions are conducive, contrails may linger..

in other words, you ran out before you began.

By agin mee on 2012 11 15 - 19:27:18
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Wayne, have you not read any of my posts? I suggest you must have misunderstood the times I have written because noting I have written coincides with your “it isn’t being done” statement.

I doubt I will continue reading this forum as it seems to be about argument and not discussion nor debate. I think it is best for people to simply believe what they believe.


“Leonard Clampett was willing to involve himself in discussion on the basis of “it isn’t being done”.  Is he still, I wonder?

Anyway, I have had some communication from Robert M. Forgette, and although I have no intention of trying to involve him in the time-wasting sado-masochism of the discussion here, perhaps there is now some hope of light being shed on the psychology of Mike Glynn, who says that Robert will “vouch for” him.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 07 10 - 21:38:19
From the entry ‘Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?’.”

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 15 - 19:11:21
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

again josh chimes in with hereward who both hypocritically pretend they dont indulge in insult.. or “abuse”

they would rather debate insults than the topic, and close down the thread because they fear they are losing the argument.

such a pretentiously haughty display - not an insult, a statement of fact.

By agin mee on 2012 11 15 - 19:07:06
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Sorry Josh, I am not here for argument I want to know why and what is being sprayed around the world, as it is.

Supersaturation of the atmosphere is impossible and not a theory. Check the science.

It would seem you believe that water detection paste is not reliable and that all the airlines and aircraft flying the world airways are in imminent danger whenever they leave the ground. That is something that should be brought to the attention of all aviation authorities, civil, military and naval, immediately.

By Leonard Clampett on 2012 11 15 - 19:04:21
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Categories