Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

Chemtrail Proof

dialogue and research on chemical trails

Chemtrail Proof

Unread postby socrates » Mon May 21, 2007 11:35 pm

{with the merged threads, the adjusted view count is +641}

This video is from Italy. It shows clearly what the white-outs look like and lend credibility to the idea that not all aircraft are involved. It also appears that blocking out the sun is the #1 objective.

Contrails or Chemtrails in Italia

{on edit- new images added}





Contrails or chemtrails and freak weather
Tenerife News: Canary Islands, Spain
Tenerife has recently again been hit by terrible weather, which has been explained as a symptom of climate change, but what everyone seems to have missed out on is that “chemtrails” were in the skies of the island just before the storms started, and chemtrails are being used for weather modification....

Chemtrails (Aerial Spraying) Over Esperance, Australia

A follow up to my previous post detailing the latest government explanation for the mass die-off of birds here in little old Esperance.
Last edited by socrates on Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

British Politicians Speak Out Against Chemtrails

Unread postby socrates » Fri May 25, 2007 3:16 pm

British Parliament


Mr. Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he is taking to reduce the amount of chemical trails from aircraft in UK airspace; and if he will make a statement. [111303]

7 Feb 2007 : Column 931W

Gillian Merron: I assume the hon. Member is referring to contrails. ‘Contrails’, which are ice crystal clouds that form at high altitudes from the exhaust products of aircraft but only when atmospheric conditions of temperature and humidity favour this. There are many uncertainties in this area and the Department is sponsoring research to reduce these and UK scientists are actively engaged in international research in this topic. The Department sponsored a major international scientific meeting last year which presented significant new research on the subject:


Adrian Sanders

Adrian Sanders
Torbay, Liberal Democrat

Parliament Questions
Bob Spink (Castle Point):To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what research his Department has (a) commissioned and (b) reviewed on the (i) chemical make-up and (ii) environmental impact of aircraft trails; and if he will make a statement.

Space Weapons Ban

On May 18, 2005, Congressman Kucinich introduced HR 2420 (first introduced in January 2002), banning the weaponization of space. This legislation would put a lid on weaponization by banning both weapons stationed in outer space and the targeting of any objects in space. (The use of space-based reconnaissance and intelligence equipment would be permitted.) Such a ban would prevent a destructive space arms race along the lines of the nuclear arms race that has placed Earth’s existence in jeopardy for over fifty years. Click here to view a copy of the legislation.

A space weapons ban will also free up money to fund more important needs. The Department of Defense's Space Based Laser, just one of many different space-based weapons being contemplated, is expected to cost $70-80 billion to develop.

How the first "space weapons ban" bill looked:
Space Preservation Act of 2001 (Introduced in House)

HR 2977 IH


1st Session

(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--

(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;

(ii) chemtrails;

(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;

(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;

(v) laser weapons systems;

(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and

(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
Last edited by socrates on Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Ok, I got an idea how to get us started.......

Unread postby socrates » Fri May 25, 2007 8:05 pm

This feels like a roomy library, nice and quiet, good for the mind. I am starting to think that even if we got more proof as regards to the fakery, perhaps we would still just be going after low level shills. Remember how Innocent Bystander was asking for the true factual history of Kucinich and the word "chemtrails" getting into a bill, or a draft of a bill? Well, the fake "believers" never really answered his question. So I think I have found interesting links on this subject which I am hoping you can help me out with, time permitting for you, I understand.

Okay, I will try to copy and paste the relevant stuff, so people won't feel they need to go chasing the links.

I went to google cache for this one from Megasprayer.
What really happened to HR2977?

Surprise, surprise, Lord Reynolds got to post at chem11's place.
jay reynolds: It looks like it was a set-up all along:

Carol Rosin was an MKultra leftover, her history goes back to Tim Leary, she now heads up the nstitute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS), which wrote HR 2977.

In a classic bait/switch designed to demoralize chemtrail believers, chemtrails were listed in a bogus space weapons bill with no chance of getting out of committee, then yanked on the first day of a new session of congress.

"In a classic bait/switch designed to demoralize chemtrail believers..."

But why the hell would anyone be interested in demoralizing chemtrail believers if said chemical trails didn't exist?

Answer: they wouldn't.

Why would Jay Reynolds offer such a theory if he didn't think there was something to it?

Nukes, Kooks, and Spooks
Issue #3, May 16th, 2000
From: Russell D. Hoffman, citizen activist
(former editor, STOP CASSINI newsletter)


In a phone conversation last Saturday (May 13th, 2000), Carol S. Rosin used the word "slander" as descriptive of what I am saying about her and will continue to say.

I denied that any part of this is slander, explaining that I am simply telling what I have seen with my own two eyes, and that I have described and continue to describe precisely what I myself have experienced as a participant in the anti-nukes-in-space movement, and that I have speculated on the cause of such sick behavior, as I am free to do. For those reasons alone there is no slander here. But furthermore, working for the United States government is not a crime, and I believe that is, ultimately, who she works for. So to accuse me of slander is absurd, but yet she has used that word. She denies any and all charges that she is a spy of any sort, working in concert with Bruce Gagnon to destroy the anti-nukes-in-space movement, and the anti-weapons-in-space movement, and any individual activists who pose a threat in any way to the sanctity of the "system" they have created, a system which assures that nothing gets changed, and that the environmental laws written to protect us 30 years ago (which were utterly useless even when they were originally written) are not properly updated to the environmental considerations of the new millennium. The result of these efforts (which Rosin denies) is that the strength of all activists who might gain a foothold in the media and the public's eye, is systematically destroyed, and the individual is morally crushed and controlled, so that they will not accomplish anything significant in their lives.

And it's all not only perfectly legal to do this, but those who practice this voodoo art of manipulation are utterly unaware that what they are doing is the least bit immoral! They have forgotten the meaning of democracy.


Carol S. Rosin further claims that I will appear suspicious if I denounce her, and that people will assume I am a spy because, she assures me the world believes, she couldn't possibly be. She says her friends will vouch for her. Then I say let them come forward and do so. Her husband stated to me on the phone the she is the most honest person he has ever met. (FYI, he is a professional actor.) As I heard someone say recently, "We're all crazy and none of us know how to act." (I wish I could remember who said it; I have literally met 500+ people in the last 6 weeks.)

I believe that my accusations will some day be proven correct, and for the sake of my pride and reputation, as well as for the sake of the need to find out what's wrong and fix it, I expect to be fully exonerated of any false charge against me. (Such as CSR has raised, namely, that it is I who is, in fact, the "spy" in our midst. Such an idea is truly preposterous, as I'm sure the CIA can tell you.)

Perhaps Rosin can collect more people today, and more famous people, than I can, in a famous-people-pissing contest, who will say she is right and I am wrong, but that will not constitute proof of anything. I am not in a popularity contest, but a search for basic, fundamental truths about democracy in America. Who's ruined the right of people to form fairly-run and honestly-guided environmental organizations, particularly those opposed to nukes in space? That's the question to be answered.

Perhaps Rosin's many friends will go out into the world, attempting to sway public opinion against me on her behalf. It will be too bad, but it won't matter. I know that I am fighting a fair battle, searching honestly for my foes before exposing and denouncing them, whether they work at NASA or pretend to be our friends, and I know that even though it may look like a dirty and mean fight to those unaccustomed to the depths of depravity to which our own government will stoop to conquer, it is, in fact, a "gentleman's war". I do not hate my enemy; they do not appear to hate me.


However, a person must be free to seek the truth, and I believe all activists should PICK A TOPIC and STICK WITH IT UNTIL THEY WIN.

That, I believe, is the only effective way to fight for anything. This NKS newsletter is nothing more than the natural followup to the STOP CASSINI newsletter, simply because this is the real reason Cassini could not be stopped. It was a lunatic idea supported by mad scientists and their lackeys. So how did it fail to be stopped? How did it fail to be investigated? How come most people still have never even heard of Cassini, despite the awesome threat to humanity which it posed, during launch in 1997 and especially, during its flyby of Earth in August, 1999?

The newsletter became an investigation into infiltrators who gain leadership positions within the movement against nukes in space, so I changed the name to Nukes, Kooks, and Spooks, and this is issue #3.

So far, for those keeping track, we have identified the following as dishonest infiltrators into various aspects of the anti-nuke movements: Carol Rosin, Regina Hagen and Bruce Gagnon (See NKS #3, #2, and #1, respectively, for the latest on these three clowns). Also a Catherine Euler in England (see Stop Cassini newsletter #190), and Alice Slater and Christa Rossner from GRACE (see SC newsletter #217). I personally believe Loring Werbil is too, though the data is still somewhat sketchy (see below for the latest information). Greenpeace, as an organization, is filled with spies. I believe all these people work for their respective governments, in a secret network, in conjunction with each other (not that all these people know each other, but they work for essentially the same group -- the Nuclear Mafia). All should be ignored and if you do deal with them you should do the exact opposite of whatever they want you to do to stop the destruction of planet earth by nuclear waste -- unless it happens to be a good idea, in which case do it, but even then, never think that it is enough. It won't be.


So anyway, I go to Wikipedia.

Dr. Carol Sue Rosin (b. March 29, 1944 in Wilmington, Delaware) is an award-winning educator, author, leading aerospace executive and space and missile defense consultant. She is a former spokesperson for Wernher von Braun and has consulted to a number of companies, organizations, government departments and the intelligence community. She is the current President of the Institute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS) which she co-founded with Alfred Webre. Dr. Rosin has received the support of various prominent individuals such as U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich [1][2], and Hon. Paul Hellyer, a former Canadian Minister of National Defence. She is also a witness for The Disclosure Project. [3]

Fairchild Industries

Dr. Rosin was the first woman to hold the position of Corporate Manager at Fairchild Industries[3] from 1974 through 1977, where she met the late Dr. Wernher von Braun. When they first met in early 1974, Von Braun was dying of cancer. [4] According to Rosin's accounts, Von Braun spent the last years of his life explaining to her his position that space-based weapons are dangerous, destabilizing, too costly, unnecessary, and unworkable, and explaining the available alternatives. [4] He asked Dr. Rosin to be his spokesperson and to appear on occasions when he was too ill to speak. [4] According to Rosin, he also asked her to take on the challenge of promoting the ban of space weapons by educating decision makers and the grassroots about transforming the military industrial complex into a peaceful space exploration industry. [4]

According to Rosin, von Braun also spoke of the existence of "off planet cultures" (extraterrestrials) and government conspiracies to keep the existence of them a secret. [4][5]

Space weapons consultant

Dr. Rosin has been a consultant to corporations and organizations, including TRW, Disney, GE, IBM and the National Space Institute on space and defense. She has testified before the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Senate, the President's Commission on Space and has met with people in over 100 countries about the feasibility of banning space-based weapons.

Current life

She is the founder and former director of the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Outer Space (ISCOS), an NGO in consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Counsel (UN-ECOSOC). [6]

She co-founded the Institute for Cooperation in Space (ICIS) in 2001 and is the current President. The ICIS board is made up of various prominent individuals such as former astronauts Edgar Mitchell & Dr. Brian O'Leary, as well as Arthur C. Clarke, General Council Daniel Sheehan and John McConnell who is the founder of International Earth Day. [6]

She currently lives in Vilcabamba, Loja, Ecuador. [6][7] She co-owns a hotel in Vilcabamba named Madre Tierra where she focuses on wildlife conservation, the study of organic foods and remedies as well as negative ions. [8]

Dr. Rosin has received the Space Humanitarian Award in 2000 from the United Societies in Space for her 30 years of dedication on the subject[9], a Science Teachers Gold Medal Award, an Aviation Writers Award and an American Society of Engineering Educators Award for organizing the motivation program "It's Your Turn" for youth, women and minorities. [10]

To cut to the chase, somehow I end up at this blog, called "Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977". For some reason I don't see the author's name, and yikes, I rattled off an e-mail to the person thinking we might have found a real person. Just a glance at the website made me think this could be a good find. But uh oh, I now see it is a debunker palace.

Ugh, I wrote and sent this before even checking out the blog. This could be Jay Reynolds himself.

Dude, I cannot believe you wrote this about a week ago. I am someone who has been {humbly} looking deep into chemtrails for about two years. Somehow I ended up at this same story, just after yourself. It's funny, a few weeks ago I wrote a post that included chemtrail central discussion of Kucinich and the space preservation bill.

Sorry I don't have more to say. I just started a new forum. If you check it out please don't let what is there now scare you.

The scariest part for me is one link I just read saying that for activists to succeed, they must stick to one issue until they win. The writer was saying that Rosin was an alphabet product. Actually, I found some old thread with a Jay Reynolds posting at a place called Megasprayer. That's what led me to your blog.

Anyway, my initial thought is this. Why would "chemtrails" be put into even a draft of a bill {I'm not sure exactly what happened}, why do that if chemtrails is a crazy internet hoax, that chemtrails are contrails?

Thanks, I actually haven't read your paper yet. It looks good. I am glad to have found this website and am looking forward to checking this place out.

Thanks for your time, "socrates"

Anyway, this blog was found at contrail science.

Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977

One of the more pervasive myths regarding “chemtrails” is that current presidential candidate Dennis Kuchinich tried to have them banned by an act of congress, but was pressured by the government to modify the act to remove mention of “chemtrails”.

So what really happened? In a nutshell, Kucinich did not write the bill (or read it, until too late), the focus of the bill is nothing to do with chemtrails, it was written by UFO enthusiasts trying to: nullifying a conspiracy by the “military-industrial complex”, allow the use of suppressed alien technology, and avoid accidentally shooting down visiting aliens. They listed a bunch of weird weapons, including mind control, tectonic weapons and chemtrails. The bill was re-written several time in less crazy language to give it chance of passing, but ultimately fizzled in committee.

The specific act was HR 2977, the “Space Preservation Act of 2001″, the stated goal of which was:

To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.

The initial version of the act is the only one that makes mention of “exotic weapons systems”, listing several technologies that will be familiar to conspiracy theorists:

(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.

Yes, it even includes “extraterrestrial weapons”, meaning weapons created by aliens (or created from alien technology from crashed flying saucers at Roswell), as well as psychotronic (mind control) weapons. Yet somehow “chemtrails” gets all the attention here.

Who wrote this? The original language for the bill was actually created by an organization called the “Institute For Cooperation In Space“, an organization whose primary purpose is to promote adoption of the Space Preservation Act. The ICIS states on its web site in part:

Humanity is on the threshold of a quantum leap in consciousness and endeavor.We must now take action to preserve this grand opportunity by preventing the weaponization of space.

We have a critical choice – to explore the great unknown of outer space or to risk continued suffering and disasters, devastation or obliteration. We can rise above different perspectives and actions that didn’t, don’t, and won’t cause second order change, actions that recognize our high consciousness and human potential applied with out-of-the-box thinking and intention to cause second order change, or we can continue the status quo of protesting the old and accepting the same that would only lead us to more violence instead of peace.

The whole site has a very “new-age” feel to it. Seemingly if only this act is passed, the military-industrial complex will turn from its warlike ways, and humanity will enter a new age of cooperation, progress and raised consciousness. The rationale for a weapons ban is never clearly explained. Nor is it explained why having weapons in space will prevent normal research and exploration of space. Obviously we would all like to see less deadly weapons floating over our heads, but is a total ban vital to the next stage of human evolution? ICIS seems to think so.

Indeed, when you talk about things in simple terms, an “international ban on weapons in space” sounds like a great idea. Like a ban on chemical weapons, it saves money and makes the world a safer place. So it’s not hard to get people to support such a ban.

The face of the ICIS, is Carol Rosin, who, together with co-founder Alfred Webre, was the architect of the original version of the bill. Back Rosin claims that in 1974 rocket scientist Werner Von Braun told her “Carol, you will stop the weaponization of space”, and described to her a vast conspiracy by the military-industrial complex to raise a series of fears to justify space-based weapons. Since then, Rosin has dedicated her life to exposing this conspiracy, and allowing humanity to expand it’s consciousness into space. Here’s a video of her explaining this.

The video shows Rosin speaking at “The Disclosure Project“, an organization working to “disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems.” Rosin herself only briefly touches on this in her speech, but it is clear she believes that the government has alien technology, and is withholding it from the people.The other board members on the ICIS are co-founder Alfred Webre, Brian O’Leary and Daniel Sheehan, all of whom are deeply involved with The Disclosure Project.

So what’s Kucinich’s involvement in this? It’s difficult to say. Kucinich is anti-war, so perhaps that’s his motivation. He does have a lot of new-age, UFO-believing, friends, but he’s also running for president. When he was made aware of the nature of the “exotic weapons” language in the bill, it was re-written, and when questioned about it, he said

I’m not into that. Understand me. When I found out that was in there, I said, ‘Look, I’m not interested in going there.’

If you actually ARE a conspiracy theorist, then all this will come as little surprise to you. You will already believe the government is covering up technology based on crashed UFOs. Yet HR2977 is constantly being mentioned solely to make the case that “chemtrails” are something the government is aware of. The reality is that they were simply given a passing mention in bill written by new-age UFO conspiracy theorists, who believe in things that are far more unusual than “chemtrails”.

Saturday 19 May 2007

There's a line from Austin Powers, "What does it all mean, Basil?"

Last edited by socrates on Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:52 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Fri May 25, 2007 8:51 pm

Ok. Why put chemtrails into a bill or a draft of a bill if they are not real?

Ok. Say some nutjob spook like Carol Rosin from the ahem, uh, The Disclosure Project, was behind some cointelpro-like operation that led her to prominence in the anti-nuke crowd. Then she so happened to get to work on that bill. Then it is just part of a staged script?

But anyway, why the cover-up on all this? It shouldn't be so tough to figure stories like this one out. It's like that Robert Taylor of AONN Records. What the **** was that about? Why are certain things so difficult to get an answer about?

My question thus is how in the hell are two nobodies like us supposed to be able to figure **** out and then articulate it? I guess we can only do our best in life to promote truth.

The Lord Reynolds quote was very revealing.

In a classic bait/switch designed to demoralize chemtrail believers, chemtrails were listed in a bogus space weapons bill with no chance of getting out of committee, then yanked on the first day of a new session of congress.

Why would he phrase his words like that? Why also did Lord Reynolds go on that obscure website to discuss dogwoods blooming in some pursuit to prove that Lou A. was "Tracker"? It could be these "Riddler" creeps keep on dropping hints to masses of people they consider to be ******* sheep.

Dude, now could be a good time for what can be a very therapeutic icon.
To Reynolds and all the other low level spooks, shills, and useful idiots,

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

I think that website might be.....

Unread postby socrates » Fri May 25, 2007 9:52 pm


Geezus, I am a fool. This contrailscience.com appears to be from the cast from the fake "debunker" side. What a tool this person is. At this website is a link to a video by epoxynous, someone who writes a lot like Lord Reynolds but over at youtube.

Actually, I don't advise anyone to go over to that website. It is complete propaganda. But I do advise that people take heed of the next posts here which will scrutinize Epoxynous' fakeness.

Here is the next phase of the astroturfing that chemtrails are contrails, courtesy of the Jay Reynolds of youtube. I am not buying any of it.

Damn, I am a chump to be giving this fake "debunker" crap so much attention. Yet, I guess the script does include both "debunkers" and "believers".
Last edited by socrates on Sat May 26, 2007 1:15 am, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

A "Debunker" Proves That All Aircraft Are Not Involved

Unread postby socrates » Fri May 25, 2007 11:46 pm

I thought I would start a thread on proof of chemtrail realities, but somehow I am still stuck in the world of low level astroturfers. There is a script all over the internet between fake "believers" and fake "debunkers". Somehow my curiosity about the bill draft including "chemtrails" has led me to some insidious video, that to be blunt, highlights the stupidity of the "debunker" side of the psy-op. On behalf of all "chemmies", thank you for this gift which provides more evidence that there are Frankensteinian atmospheric shenanigans going on above us. For if chemtrails are a crazy hoax, who would go to this much trouble to spread such propaganda.

Chemtrails were Contrails

Added: May 09, 2007
From: Epoxynous
The images and videos that people present as "chemtrails" are identical to historical reports of contrails. As far back as 1944, contrails were reported to persist, spread, and cover the sky.

See ContrailScience.com for details.

Epoxynous is the "Jay Reynolds" of youtube, if not actually "Jay" himself. Epoxynous has also started a new website called contrailscience.com, where I first came into contact with the video.

The key to this all is to freeze the screen, so that you can see what the news clippings and pictures are all about. I will do my best to transcribe what I see. But anyway, sometimes these tools make it so easy for truthseekers to see through their shenanigans. I apologize in advance for any errors in transcribing. If I do mess up, it is because some of this is very tough to read.

The video is 85 seconds.

Chemtrails were contrails all the way back through history since 1944.

Then it zooms in on an old newspaper.


It zooms in on an article titled Vapour Trails Bane To Pilots, Former News-Post Photog Says.

Vapor trails similar to the one which a high-flying airplane left over this city early in February are a bane to pilots since they are a "dead give-away for fighter aircraft and anti-aircraft gunners," Tech Sergt. Robert L. Yinger, former News - Post photographer writes from Muroe{illegible?}, Calif., where he is stationed with the 336th{?} Bomber Squadron.....

The next part Epoxynous zooms in so you don't miss a thing, which is the crux of the ******** misdirection, that all aircraft are capable of creating "chemtrails" and fake overcast. The main point is that this ******* Epoxynous didn't figure that someone would be able to slow down the video and see that all his examples were from military aircraft, not commercial ones.

Sergt. Yinger then makes this interesting observation: "Contrails frequently have a tendency to cause a complete overcast and cause rain. In Idaho I have seen contrails formed in a perfectly clear sky and four hours later a complete overcast resulted....

It'd be nice to see the whole article, but the ******* shill had a marketing job to do, so he moved on.

And there's more

He put up a picture titled Vapor Trails Paint Battlefront Sky. Then he rattled off various news clippings, at a pace that one could say was insidious and full of subliminals.

"Vapor Trails Get Many Excited"

Vapor trails formed by condensation of aircraft engines in cold or freezing temperatures put Peninsula residents in a tizzy late yesterday afternoon.

Ordinarily white, the vapor trails were scarlet and gold from the setting sun.

Police departments from San Jose to South San Francisco were flooded with calls from 5:15 and 5:25 with reports ranging from "a burning plane" and "meteors" to "flying saucers." However, it was only a B-50 bomber flying at 25,000.

Another clip pops up, but is tough to read, one can only see the headline.

Sky 'Objects' Probably Plane Vapor

Last edited by socrates on Sat May 26, 2007 1:43 am, edited 11 times in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

******* Fake "Debunker" Exposed

Unread postby socrates » Sat May 26, 2007 12:57 am

The next news clip reads:
The Galveston Daily News
Mystery Veils Vapor Wreath In Galveston's Sunny Skies

We are now up to 53 seconds in the short film. I'm almost done exposing this chump trying to cover up chemtrails. Damn, this chump made it very difficult to transcribe these clippings. But I am not gonna let this asshat get away with this insidous **** which actually proves that commercial aircraft are not involved with chemtrails, that chemtrails are quite different from contrails, persistent or not. I can't read what the date is on this one, but with some effort the following is as it was originally in that paper. Maybe next psy-op, they make up a fake old paper saying these kinds of trails come from commercial aircraft. :P

It wasn't a sky-written soft-drink ad and the weatherman couldn't offer an explanation either for the fat white streaks of vapor hanging motionless in Galveston's skies around noon saturday.

But it seemed fairly certain that a six-engined B-36 left the heavy white trail in its wake as it circled over the city.

Neither municipal airport nor civil aeronautics authority officials had a flight plan on the bomber. Both outfits, however, believed that the jet-powered B-36 was on a training mission from Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth.

An Air Force spokesman at Carswell Base refused to comment on either the bomber or its 'vapor trail' when contacted late Saturday by The News.

Mystery of the massive vapor streaks was their long, steady persistence in breezed-stirred skies rather than their expulsion from the jet-powered plane. Airport officials commented that a vapor trail usually fades away swiftly, as in sky-writing.

They also said that planes may leave vapor trails when flying at high altitudes. But it was unlikely, they added, that the air would remain still enough to keep the vapor from fading swiftly.

Another odd thing---onlookers said the bomber engines rather than the jet exhausts were pushing out the vapor clouds.

The only thing certain about the vapor mystery seems to be that the B-36 was flying at altitudes between 10,000 and 25,000 feet as it circled Galveston...

We should thank this ******* "debunker" for providing all this evidence that chemtrails are under some type of military authorization and have nothing to do with commercial aircraft, unlike what a lot of pr hacks and shills lie about all over these chemtrail boards.

Now we are at 54 seconds.

Jet Causes Vapor Trail Across Sky

Wow, what an *******, insidious fake this creep is. First, here is the story.
No- It wasn't a flying saucer which left a vapor trail across the Kingsport sky Wednesday afternoon.

According to the Tri-Cities Airport Weather Bureau the long white streak which spanned the city from east to west around 1 p.m. yesterday was caused by special weather conditions and a jet airplane.

The Times-News made an inquiry after receiving telephone calls from curious residents who had seen the trail.

Weather observers at the Bureau said a layer of moisture existed in the air Wednesday afternoon at just the right level to form a vapor with the jet's exhaust. On windier days, or on days when moisture was at a different level, no vapor trail is formed, the experts said....

Somehow the jackass disinfo creep doesn't think anyone can see through this ********. When the video hit 57 seconds, the creep subliminally tossed in some totally different news clip, which if one weren't careful, they could have easily thought that the following was a continuation of the article above.

...condensation of moisture in the air by heat from plane engines. This condensed moisture then freezes into a streamer-like cloud.

Perhaps the most graphic demonstrations of vapor trails were seen in England and Europe during World War II, when formations of 1,000 to 2,000 bombers carried death and destruction to the German forces.

These huge formations would lay thousands of intermingling trails which would actually form a cloud cover and change a clear day into a cloudy one.

Jet contrails spread and covered the sky in 1969

There is a photo taken from a secluded looking part of Boulder, Colorado from Dec. 17th, 1969. Anyone want to bet against it coming from military aircraft????

Ha, then there is one more photo that isn't even visible, then the movie fades out with:

See More: ContrailScience.Com

What a *******, fake "debunker". This was almost too easy, a bit tedious to transcribe, but what a friggin ******* hack astroturfer.

:P :mrgreen: 8)
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

More on Dennis Kucinich and Chemtrails

Unread postby socrates » Mon May 28, 2007 12:52 am

Too bad so many real stories are getting scrubbed, revised, or buried under an avalanche of misdirection. The limited hangout is that some spooky kook named Carol Rosin somehow got "chemtrails" into a version of a bill, that once Kucinich heard of this, he had the word deleted from the bill.

The truth appears that Kucinich was indeed well aware of chemtrails, but that he either got leaned on or felt a political need to not take aggressive action at the time to protect our skies from the covert program{s}.

Bob Fitrakis articles for Columbus Alive

reprinted from
COLUMBUS ALIVE – Your Guide To Columbus and Central Ohio

Bob Fitrakis is a Political Science Professor at Columbus State Community College. He has published the Free Press since 1992 and acted as editor since 1993. Dr. Fitrakis writes for the Columbus Alive, a local alternative weekly newspaper and has also written for other national and local publications. He has won numerous investigative reporting awards. From 1990-2001, Dr. Fitrakis co-hosted a regular public access news/public affairs program, offering analysis of political events and social issues, locally and nationally. Since June 1996 he has co-hosted a weekly public affairs call-in talk radio program on WSMZ 103.1FM. — excerpt from the Free Press, under the link COLUMNS


How Kucinich’s “chemtrails” disappeared… from right under Congress’ nose!
By Bob Fitrakis
March 28, 2002
U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich’s Space Preservation Act of 2001, introduced last October seeking a “permanent ban on basing of weapons in space,” specifically banned chemtrails as weapons. Now, in a new version of the bill, the “chemtrails” language has disappeared. The missing words are part of an eyes-wide-open denial that says as much about the cover-up as it does about the spraying that’s plainly visible in the sky.

On March 16, in a front-page story titled “Conspiracy theorists look up,” the Akron Beacon Journal noted that Kucinich’s bill “had been rewritten…and the references to chemtrails and the other types of weapons were quietly eliminated.” The Beacon Journal article, linking chemtrails to conspiracies, resulted from massive local pressure. Michel Massullo of Akron provided Columbus Alive with rolls of photos of plane trails and a sworn affidavit attesting to extensive aerial activity over that city on February 18 and February 24.

Sources close to Kucinich’s new bill, HR 3616, which has been endorsed by some 254 community groups throughout the nation, say the term “chemtrail” was dropped because Kucinich, a Democrat from Lakewood, couldn’t get the Union of Concerned Scientists or the Federation of American Scientists to sign on.

Previously explaining the government’s position, Lieutenant Colonel Michael K. Gibson of the U.S. Air Force wrote U.S. Representative Mark Green in August 2000 and stated, “The term ‘chemtrail’ is a hoax that began circulating approximately three years ago which asserts the government is involved in a joint federal program of covert spraying of the public.”

It’s a classic non-denial denial: Gibson is denying that the Air Force is secretly spraying U.S. citizens. The reality is the U.S. Space Command and other government agencies are involved in ongoing experiments for military and environmental purposes that involve aerial spraying, and the microfibers and other sprayed chemicals inevitably fall to earth, putting the public at risk.

Before you believe Gibson’s and the government’s “denial,” do an Internet search for the following terms: Joint Vision for 2020; weather as a force [multiplier]; owning the weather by 2025; Eastlund; and Edward Teller. Two scientists working at Wright Patterson Air Force Base confirmed to Alive that they were involved in aerial spraying experiments. One involved aluminum oxide spraying related to global warming and the other involved barium stearate and had to do with high-tech military communications.

The U.S. government has a long history of denying inexcusable covert operations. These are the people who told you about the joys of nuclear radiation and Readi Kilowatt, that Agent Orange could defoliate a tropical jungle overnight but was harmless to humans. This is the same government that secretly experimented on its citizens with everything from syphilis to LSD.

The Pentagon would now have you believe that the mass sightings of chemtrails all over North America are collective hallucinations, even though the boys at the government’s Lawrence Livermore experimental lab admit that they’ve discussed all this aerial spraying and run computer simulations on the effects of weather modification for military and peacetime purposes.

A brief history of the chemtrail phenomenon can be traced to a Washington state man who told award-winning investigative reporter William Thomas that he’d become ill on New Year’s Day 1999 after watching several jets make strange lines in the sky. Within six months, Thomas, writing primarily for the Environmental News Service, had detailed over 700 eyewitness reports of chemtrails from 40 states.

Mainstream newspapers have gone out of their way to dismiss these eyewitness accounts. Thomas told the New Mexican newspaper in June 1999, “It’s easier to sell UFOs to major media than a phenomena as close in many cities as the nearest window.”

The New Mexican took a skeptical view of the local Skywatchers group and their account of “unmarked government planes puffing strange white smoke, making cryptic Xs and tic-tac-toe designs, covering the air above as the puzzled populace looks up in fear and confusion.” The photos from Akron that arrived last week show the same patterns in the sky.

A news database search showed that 24 local TV stations from around the country have reported on and dismissed the same phenomenon in the last few years. On January 14, Baltimore’s WJZ-TV report included a visual of “last Thursday morning’s chemtrails seen in the sky.” The story was almost identical to one broadcast by Orlando station WOFL in July 2000.

Last May, the West-Quebec Post spread chemtrails photographs across its front page (the Canadian press has been much more open to investigating the phenomenon). Fred Ryan, the Post’s publisher, reported that his readers had been photographing and comparing the aerial activity for some time.

While the U.S. government is busy with the latest in a long series of covert experiments, and contemptuously attempts to convince eyewitnesses that they’re crazy, non-governmental organizations are quietly circulating a proposed UN treaty titled Permanent Ban on Basing of Weapons in Space; listed under the heading “Exotic weapons” is the term “chemtrails.” This treaty is a direct outgrowth of UN General Assembly Resolution 55/32, passed 138-0 with three nations abstaining (the United States, Israel and Micronesia).

Sooner or later the government will declassify documents, as it inevitably does, showing that it engaged in aerial spraying for military and environmental purposes. Until then, the government will continue to tell us we don’t see what we obviously see.

Originating web page

The government says they don’t exist, but Kucinich wants Congress to take action

By Bob Fitrakis
January 24, 2002
The debate surrounding the federal government’s alleged weather modification experiments has landed in the U.S. Capitol, thanks to Cleveland Democrat Dennis Kucinich. Representative Kucinich introduced the Space Preservation Act of 2001 on October 2 last year, seeking a “permanent ban on [the] basing of weapons in space.”

The bill, HR 2977, specifically outlaws a variety of weapons detailed in the December 6, 2001, Columbus Alive article “Stormy Weather,” which exposed allegations of secret government aerial spraying activities. Kucinich’s bill explicitly outlaws “chemtrails.”

Alive asked Kucinich why he would introduce a bill banning so-called chemtrails when the U.S. government routinely denies such things exist and the U.S. Air Force has routinely called chemtrail sightings “a hoax.”

“The truth is there’s an entire program in the Department of Defense, ‘Vision for 2020,’ that’s developing these weapons,” Kucinich responded. Kucinich says he plans to reintroduce a broader version of the bill later this month. “Plasma, electromagnetics, sonic or ultrasonic weapons [and] laser weapons systems” were among those banned by HR 2977.

Two scientists working at Wright Patterson Air Force Base informed Alive of the ongoing secret experiments, one involving weather modification and the other involving the creation of an aerial antenna using a barium stearate chemical trail. The scientists referred to the work of legendary inventor Nikola Tesla. Before Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (or “Star Wars”), there was Tesla’s vision of high-tech space-based warfare and weather modification.

According to Tesla biographer Margaret Cheney, federal agents seized Tesla’s papers after his death in 1943. “[At] least one set of Tesla’s papers had reached Wright Field [now Wright Patterson Air Force Base],” Cheney wrote. The Aeronautic Systems Division at Wright Patterson admitted it had the Tesla papers but claim they were “destroyed.”

However, Tesla’s dream is embodied in a glossy brochure titled “Vision for 2020” released by the U.S. Space Command in 1998. The brochure states, “The emerging synergy of space superiority with land, sea and air superiority will lead to Full Spectrum Dominance.”

The Space Command spells out its purpose pretty plainly: “Dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests and investment.”

There’s nothing new here, for those who have been paying attention. In the 1970s, Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, bluntly stated in his book Between Two Ages, “Technology will make available, to the leaders of major nations, techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which only a bare minimum of the security forces need to be appraised… [T]echniques of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm.”

On January 4 this year, Canadian Professor Michel Chossudovsky, of the Center for Research on Globalization at the University of Ottawa, issued a report noting that weapons have the ability to trigger climate changes. “Both the Americans and the Russians have developed capabilities to manipulate the world’s climate. In the U.S., the technology is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) as part of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI),” Chossudovsky wrote. “Recent scientific evidence suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability of potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction.”

Doubters of the military’s secret plans should refer to George and Meredith Friedman’s The Future of War, Power, Technology and American World Dominance in the 21st Century. The Friedmans, government-touted “arms experts” and favorites of the military-industrial complex, assert that “The American experience of power will rest on the domination of space.”

The U.S. Air Force giddily embraced the Friedmans’ thesis in the 1996 report “New World Vistas: Air And Space Power For The 21st Century.” The Air Force report notes, “In the next two decades, new technologies will allow the fielding of space-based weapons of devastating effectiveness to be used to deliver energy and mass as force projection in tactical and strategic conflict.”

State University of New York Professor of Journalism Karl Grossman, writing in 1999, revealed how the mainstream corporate press virtually ignores the government’s pronouncements while trade journals like Space News, Defense News, Aviation Week, Space Technology and Electronic Engineering Times routinely report on the military-industrial complex’s high-tech breakthroughs.

As for chemtrail skeptics, they might want to consult Rutgers University Political Science Professor Leonard Cole’s book Clouds of Secrecy: The Army’s Germ Warfare Test Over Populated Areas. Chemtrail deniers are apparently happy with the thought that their beloved paternalistic government would engage in aerial spraying over densely populated areas.

U.S. Representative Marty Sabo, a Democrat from Minnesota, denounced “the secret Army program to spray Minneapolis and other cities with chemicals in the 1950s and ’60s,” the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported in September 1994. “The idea that the government would use its own citizens as guinea pigs is appalling, and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms,” Sabo told a House subcommittee investigating the secret spraying, which used fluorescent tracers to mark wind patterns.

As for the Army, it argues that the secret Cold War-era spraying was not “human experimentation” since it didn’t target any specific individuals and the zinc cadmium sulfide used was harmless. But the International Agency for Research on Cancer lists all cadmium compounds as known cancer-causing agents.

Former students of Clinton Elementary in south Minneapolis told an investigating panel from the National Research Council that the Army’s secret chemical spraying adversely affected their health, according to the Star Tribune.

Skeptics who continue to insist the government would never be involved in secret aerial spraying, particularly in Ohio, may want to address their questions to the C-130 aircrews from the 910th Airlift Wing stationed at Youngstown’s Air Reserve Station. In July 2000, an Air Force press release bragged, “Fifteen service members from military installations in Germany and England were at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, 8-12 May, learning how to use chemicals to destroy the enemy… The seven airmen and eight soldiers learned how to plan, execute and oversee the entire process of applying pesticides by air.” The press release said the Youngstown air unit will only be used against “insects with their deadly diseases.”

Apparently insects take many forms. During the Seattle demonstrations against the World Trade Organization in November 1999, CNN reported that a military air unit with pathogen capacity to induce sickness in humans was deployed against the demonstrators.

Originating web page
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:29 pm

I sincerely believe that eyewitness observations of "chemtrailing" are valid evidence that something strange and deliberate is going on. Recently, I have been hearing loud jets, not tremendously loud, but still quite audible, with a distinctive rumbling sound to them, flying in the early a.m., while it is still very dark outside. Last night I heard such consistent rumbling. When I woke up today, I was welcomed to milky-white, blue skies.

My thought is this. During daylight, when the "spraying" takes place, there is no audible proof of the jets. If it weren't for the monstrous trails being dispersed, one would have to be looking up to notice them. I now think that the ones flying during the dark hours do not have "silencers" like the daytime ones. Why not? For one, the rumbling is not that obvious. One needs to probably be outside to hear it. Secondly, here is an article that points out that there are drawbacks to using the new "silencer" technologies.

SILENCER' – low-noise engines making Europe a quieter place
24 March 2005

Europe's citizens can look forward to quieter skies as the benefits of a new EU-funded low-noise research project flow into the next-generation engines of both large and small aircraft in the next few years.

Known as SILENCER, the €110-million, four-year project involves some 50 European companies, universities and research institutes in a concerted effort to reduce jet engine noise while controlling equipment cost, weight and performance. The overall goal is to reduce aircraft noise by as much as 6 decibels by 2008.

A wide range of engine technologies are being tested, from low-noise fans to nozzle jet-noise suppressors, as well as modifications to parts of the aircraft itself such as wings and landing gear in order to reduce their noise ‘signature’.

But achieving this goal presents some difficult technical challenges, explains Eugene Kors, the project's coordinator, who works within the research and development department at French engine maker Snecma. “Jet engines are already much quieter than even a decade ago, so the margin for big leaps in progress is rather narrow, which means we have to look at all performance factors if we're going to 'squeeze out' more silence from the aircraft as a whole,” he says.

Trade-offs are inevitable

Part of the problem, according to Kors, is that nothing comes for free in terms of aircraft performance. “For many solutions, there is a trade-off between noise and fuel efficiency. Or there's a wake penalty,” he says, referring to the pattern of air turbulence, or ‘wake vortex’, that trails behind an aircraft, sometimes for kilometres, that other aircraft must avoid for safety. “So this is a challenge for us, which is why we are looking at an extremely wide range of technologies.”

Technology for retrofitting and re-engining

Airlines generally face two choices for reducing engine noise. One is to re-tool, or retrofit, their existing aircraft engines with so-called ‘hush kits’ and other noise-reducing parts and systems. The other is to re-engine, or completely replace, an old engine with a new one. “An airline's first choice is to retrofit rather than re-engine,” observes Kors.

SILENCER will offer both: new retrofit technologies and newly designed engines. “There are a lot of aircraft engines approaching the 20-year mark of their design, such as those used in Airbus 330s and 340s or Boeing 737s and 747s, so there is a big retro-fit market out there,” he says, adding that SILENCER is also looking ahead to the next-generation engines of the future Airbus 380 and Boeing 787.

Getting the technology to market

Though large aircraft overwhelmingly dominate the aviation sector, SILENCER is not overlooking the industry's niche markets and smaller players. In fact, the latter will likely benefit from the project's research before the mass-market players.

According to Kors, “SILENCER's first applications should be to the smaller and lower-cost end of the equipment market: the business jets and regional aircraft that carry under 100 passengers.” But smaller aircraft mean lower noise levels, so why the priority?

“Business and regional jets are not big sources of noise at large airports,” says Kors, “but at Europe's small and regional airports, where business jets are their sole source of income and traffic, the noise problem can be a major source of complaints. That's why we're looking at their engines too, and planning to bring SILENCER's benefits to them first.”

One final thought, and it is back to the idea that Epoxynous is a low level astroturfer, probably even Jay Reynolds himself. Before Epoxynous was exposed here, he made one very interesting post a few months back. One can see through this and other posts made by Epoxynous at youtube, that one of his primary goals is to portray chemtrails as kooky.

Chemical Skies in Georgia USA (2005)

{two months ago}
posted by Epoxynous:

Orgonite works as well as mood rings.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Sun Jun 03, 2007 3:36 pm

{on edit: The Terry Stewart story has been confirmed as having been a total fabrication. Will Thomas has plenty to answer to as regards to his own credibility. Link to the Official Retraction}

{on edit- I have found links to the missing Vancouver Courier articles using the wayback machine.}

{bad link}
The Vancouver Courier

wayback machine:
Code: Select all

Back in 2001, residents of British Columbia called Terry Stewart, a manager for the Victoria Airport Authority, complaining about ******** going on in the skies above them. Stewart told one concerned citizen,

"From what I gather, it's a military exercise, a U.S. and Canada Air Force exercise that's going on. They wouldn't give me any specifics on it. Hope that helps your interest."

{educational purposes}

Now if anyone reads through the whole article and gets discouraged by the writer's slant, here are some letters to the editors in response to this copywritten story.

{bad link}

wayback machine:
Code: Select all

{bad link}

wayback machine:
Code: Select all

Espanola, Canada had been previously so besieged by chemtrails that they petitioned the government for redress.

{disinfo website alert}

Here is a page of links that looks promising on the surface. It's even got some blogs. The problem I think is we are so eager to find chemtrail truths, that we are vulnerable to being led down rabbit holes. While there might be some good stuff here and there, just running through some of the links, I notice too much crazy stuff, like links to the educate-yourself website. There is also a link to a show called the Power Hour. That sounds like the show William Cooper did, or like some Art Bell ****, I am not sure. But as many already know, Jay Reynolds says he was friends with the fruitcake Cooper.

If there isn't a deliberate effort to make chemtrails appear as kooky, then elephants can fly.

What a bogus link this is, where one can buy crystals and ****. For a website trying to sell "chemtrail" related products, why are there so many debunker links?

I believe 100% that we are correct May41970, for why are we attacked so much? If what we say is so ridiculous, then why all the attention? Same for Lord Jay Reynolds and Epoxynous{contrailscience}. If chemtrails are such a crazy hoax, why all the pseudo-skeptic fanaticism?

From that same web address, here is a link to where rightwing scum take aim at one of my DemocraticUnderground threads.
Code: Select all

ContrailScience {Epoxynous/ Jay Reynolds} and his take on HR2977 is even linked to on this page. WTF? Could these shits make it any more obvious that what we say is true, that there is a paid astroturfing campaign to muddy the waters, attempts to guide folks to the phoney script between "believers" and "debunkers", to give anyone new or on the fence a reason to go into denial over what is obviously going on above us?
Last edited by socrates on Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:03 am, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Return to Frankensteinian Atmospheric Shenanigans

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests