And if you don’t believe Google, check out Wikipedia and you can see there also that chemtrails are a conspiracy theory.

you are right, it is not possible to turn contrails on and off.

The accepted explanation is that the atmosphere is far from homogenous; this includes humidity. Contrails need a high (relative) humidity - if a plane is leaving an area with high humidity, the contrail will stop in the dry air.

lol - accepted explanation? show me where what you say has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt - that what you say is in fact ‘the accepted explanation’anywhere.

i agree - and didnt need you to explain to me - that contrails are indeed subject to certain atmospheric conditions, but that doesnt explain why i can witness planes flying with what i consider normal contrails, and on the same day, at the same time, others flying around with totally abnormal contrails, chemtrails, being switched on and off.

where i live, hundreds of miles inland..semi arid - we have quite stable weather for days on end.. totally cloud free for days at a time, except for days when they are spraying..  ive watched a perfectly clear sky, turn completely “overcast” entirely from what has come out of the back of planes flying over.. on more than one occasion.

you are in no position to tell me what i am or am not seeing,  i trust my intellectual integrity more than your unsubstantiated unqualified opinions, while slightly amusing, they are far from anything close to resembling any sort accepted anything.

quite frankly, nothing you say is news, or informative, it is merely a regurgitation of the official spin that has been an inadequate explanation for years now, for a growing number of concerned people all over the world. if you cant offer anything of substance, it does beg the question as to why you bother saying anything at all, because plainly, people with concerns find your unqualified opinions, severely lacking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t-TRVNeRXHI

part two is equally as edifying
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxC0lyggMN8&feature=relmfu

i would disregard as ignorant at best, and disingenuous at worst, any attempt to claim that what is depicted in those videos, to be what anyone would consider normal contrail behavior under any circumstances.

Skywatcher,

to see just how variable the atmosphere can be, have a look at the daily measurements made by weather balloons.

Example from today in Amarillo, TX:
http://weather.unisys.com/upper_air/skew/ua_sound.php?type=no&city=kama&region=sp&t=cur&expanddiv=hide_bar

The relative humidity is represented by the leftmost white line which is jumping right and left like crazy in the current diagram (may be historic by the time you watch it, try “-12” to see the previous diagram).
BTW, it also shows that the temperature in 36000 feet (10500 m) altitude is around -30 deg. Celsius. Note that it is summer in Texas.

Do you really believe that your explanation of broken trails (On/Off switch for spraying of unknown substance) is better than mine? Proven beyond doubt?

What would you accept as evidence that my explanation is closer to reality than yours? I’m really interested.

Regarding trails and weather change to “overcast”: the explanation is that the influx of humid air favours the creation of trails. So it’s simply the other way round: the trails are a consequence of weather change, not the cause. Not plausible?

Skywatcher don’t you think that a better policy would be to talk ABOUT Josh rather than WITH him?

After all, what we are interested in investigating is what is being proposed and what is being done in the name of weather modification and geoengineering, is it not?

What is the purpose of endlessly going over the same ground in the same red herring discussion that was launched as a diversion so many many years ago by the same people who decided to embark upon these world-destroying programmes?

Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned from what I have seen openly proposed in writing here in Greece in some Orthodox churches as the way to deal with Jehovah’s Witnesses. They say that discussion with Jehovah’s witnesses should always be public and in front of a group, the purpose being of course to make use of group dynamics, because Jehovah’s witnesses like getting people separated from their reference group and love one-to-one discussions. Group dynamics make it possible to talk about the proselytiser rather than with him.

Many years ago, when chemtrails were something new, and chemtrails debunkers were more numerous, they themselves often made use of group dynamics and worked in aggressive packs on discussion forums. But these times are (perhaps) long past. It is quite a while since I have met anyone who wants to say off the internet the things that Josh is still interested in saying on the internet.

Of course it you wish to keep on arguing these same points again and again go ahead.  I have more or less said what I have to say and I don’t wish to be disruptive or try to monopolize the discussion. But really….......

yes Wayne, i understand your point, but as this is an internet forum, it is in fact quite public anyway, i think if i address either you or josh here, it makes little difference, the same people will still read what it is i have to say. besides, i do enjoy it

if i understand you correctly, youre of the opinion that its not worth trying to differentiate between contrails and chemtrails, and that particular argument was part of the controlled dissent to help thwart any debate on geo engineering in general? - as an easy straw man to be knocked down? -

thats an easily understood point, but in my opinion, as a layman, theres nothing i find easier to understand than what my own eyes are telling me, and if it was indeed their intent for the difference between contrail and chemtrail to be used as a red herring, i think it may have backfired on them, because clearly, to me anyway, people uploading videos of whats going on around them, makes a powerful case of obvious spraying i think.

recent government admissions of geo engineering and the current reporting of such, leaves them with not much of leg to stand on now anyway, and personally i think videos that show abnormal trails just adds more weight to the fact that its not unreasonable to ask what is in fact going on, if people can see and understand what is happening right above them, it might cause them to act with a little more purpose than reading about general weather modification going on elsewhere.

i know full well the methods people like josh use to obfuscate discussions with mis information, disinformation and extraneous minutia, pretending to be a qualified expert on every aspect, as if his opinion alone is the only one worth any consideration.. as far as bully tactics are concerned, i dont see josh as much of a threat in that regard, and i welcome it as an opportunity for scorn and derision.

while i agree that it is pointless to engage in joshs circle jerk tactics, to the point that it would ever change his mind, thats not my intent, i just dont think it hurts the call for investigation at all to keep repeating the salient points, for the benefit of anyone else who may have the misfortune to stumble across this blog.

i think ive clearly made my point, to most who read this, even if josh struggles, that his banal unqualified opinion can not be taken as definitive proof of anything, nor does anything he say remove the growing credible reasonable doubt as more and more people are looking up and realising something is just not right.

im sure i also explained that the only evidence i would be happy with concerning spraying, weather modification, geo engineering, is a verdict beyond all reasonable doubt, after a properly convened transparent independent unfettered expert investigation has concluded, after examining all evidence.

not being as au fait with all aspects of weather modification and geo engineering as you seem to be, i can only argue what i know, but i dont think saying i dont believe what im seeing are normal contrails as i understand them, and that what ive witnessed causes me concern, lessens your method of argument at all.

so with that in mind, to simply repeat a point for benefit of the lumpen josh: i would disregard as ignorant at best, and disingenuous at worst, any attempt to claim that what is depicted in those videos, to be what anyone would consider normal contrail behavior under any circumstances.

if you struggle so much with basic english comprehension, i suggest you seek the guidance of a suitably qualified 12 year old who has successfully passed their primary education.

/scorn /derision

http://farmwars.info/?p=8970

http://farmwars.info/?p=8970

Wayne Hall,

refusing to discuss issues is one thing.
Disrupting an on-topic discussion between others is annother thing.

I call that trolling.

Skywatcher,

let me tell you about my Saturday.

I spent it on our airfield. The cloud display was quite interesting: some altocumulus at first, dissolving when the thermals started and the cumulus clouds started to appear. Later there was a cirrus layer above it all, complete with spreading contrails, short contrails, fall streaks, cirrus uncinus and feathered ones, and at one time even a sun halo. When evening came closer, there were some lenticularis clouds which was a bit surprising.

I also spend an hour or so in a gliding one-seater, circling underneath a cumulus cloud, almost touching it after gaining height in the thermal below it; then I followed a ‘cloud street’ which allowed me to go in a straight line, without the need for circling.

You are not the only skywatcher. Others are doing it too but are not coming to your conclusions.

Discussion will continue in a new post.

Skywatcher,

I don’t see anything sinister in the video you linked, but we were still talking broken contrails - or was it trails over arid lands, trails in cirrus fields or trails of varying persistence in different altitude levels?

Did you have a look at the atmospheric sounding diagrams? What do you think?

The significant variation of humidity depending on the altitude explains that there can be contrails in one level and a total lack of them in annother (close) level.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjRBVcqPOL4

Wayne… A word…  The guy who shot that video , I have talked to him, IMHO is a certified nut case. Check out his other videos.. Sylphs, invisible cloaked UFOs which eat chemtrails…. Unmarked silen tmystery aircraft which are anything but. ( I think he actually filmed me in my Yak 18t once claiming I was a ” scout ship”!!!

He is entertaining, but please, if that guy and his “evidence” is the best you have…...

Well, at least that’s some new and interesting information.

I have written of nutcases: http://www.bluenomore.com/JekyllHyde.html

But it doesn’t explain what is shown in the video.

By the way, Mike, on the subject of who we have talked to, have you ever talked to Carl Needham, who runs the Blue No More site???  He is a pilot too.  He is a very private person, the exact opposite of an activist. But he is not a nutcase.

Some more Australian input:
http://media.cigionline.org/geoeng/2009 - Virgoe - International governance of a possible geoengineering intervention to combat climate change.pdf

Do chemtrails activists and climate change sceptics share any common ground that can help us deal with these attitudes, which people can get away with in academia.

Look at the great intellectual Clive Hamilton. He has his knickers in a twist in the face of the geoengineers.

That should be:
http://media.cigionline.org/geoeng/2009 - Virgoe - International governance of a possible geoengineering intervention to combat climate change.pdf

Do a copy and paste.

Speaking of copy/paste,

here is a copy of my post about Carl Needham (see comments page 1).
May save some time for anyone lookin at Wayne Hall’s reference.

———————————————-
Christine,

the link you gave points to a person named Carl Needham. The only hint of him being a pilot is his claim on his Flash-heavy web site: “... thousands of hours of command instrument flying ...”.

You can do this in a single-engine Cessna, flying through Cumulus clouds, but never come even close to the flight levels where commercial jets are cruising. There is no hint of him being a commercial pilot. See his LinkedIn page.

As for his claims, regrettably he is quoting “sources” in his paper which are long debunked inside and out, like Cliff Carnicom, Michael J. Murphy and others. His main point is “[these clouds] can not be satisfactorily explained in terms of either common jet vapour contrails or supersaturated persistent contrails”.

While he does not give any explanation for that claim, it’s worth to note that he is aware of the existence of persisting contrails - which is the whole point of the article on the top.

I don’t know whether or not he is a pilot. I take him at his word. I have spoken to him on the telephone but I didn’t ask him if he is a pilot, any more than I would ask Pat Mooney if the moratorium on geoengineering is being observed or if chemtrails are contrails. People who want to ask these questions can ASK THEM!