|Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.
Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!
“Since this place is so raw, how 'bout we use this thread to hash out ideas. It can be opinionated. I don't want anyone to feel like they are walking on eggshells.”.
Spring 2005 - Topic #3: Was it in 1997 that Will Thomas is credited with coining the term "chemtrails"? Well, not to take the wind out of his sails, but it appears that the folks at the United States Air Force Academy beat him to it by quite a few years.
There were courses, starting in Spring 1990, presented by the USAFA Department of Chemistry, with the intriguing title of "Chemtrails". The image below is from the title page of the Fall 1991 course policies and laboratory manual and was found in the Library of Kent State University.
It appears that this course was related solely to the chemistry of traditional condensation trails and that this use of Chemtrails was simply a "catchy" coined term used in the title of the courses - so don't take this too seriously! But one has to wonder...
The above is a partial listing from another US reference, or depository, library where the actual course material may be available.
In addition it appears that there was a book published - or one of the courses was presented in book form. The book is titled, you guessed: "Chemtrails" and is ISBN: 0840378246 by USAF Staff and published by: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, May 1992. It is a paperback of 224 pages.
Some have questioned how the word "chemtrails" came to appear in the Bill by Congressman Kucinich, D-Ohio - HR 2977, the Space Preservation Act of 2001. As you see above, it appears that in certain circles in the United States Air Force, it was a term well known before that time.
If I'm trying to get to the bottom of what I'm seeing above my head I want to be able to see what other rational people consider to be a bone-fide contrails as opposed to examples of aerosol use. (This is why some disinfo pages post ambiguous pictures and claim them to be cast-iron examples of contrails). I also want to see a number of reputable “definitions” of a contrail – and a link to that web page where you can type in the all the relevant data and see whether contrails could feasibly form or not. If you like I'll try to write a short piece to help newcomers get to grips with measuring altitude by calibrating their camera by taking pictures of known objects at known distances and assigning known values to individual pixel lengths....
Something like “Contrails vs aerosol operations – how to tell the difference” would be gentler and more useful. I don't know about you, but most people really don't WANT to believe in this horror, so will be looking for any reason to dismiss the “herald of scary things” as a nutter. A heading like “Chemtrail videos and photographs” would be enough for some to run home to Dan Rather for a sugar fix. Tread carefully, one step at a time, like they do.
Aerosol reports? Hmm. Yes, but different from the above. I think it's good to have people reporting major operations, but it's only of limited use really. You know, unsupported claims of “loads of chemtrails here today”, leaving the way open to rants about not knowing the altitude or the temperature, blah blah blah. I realise I did just that earlier in the evening, but it was in the context of a wider discussion and it wasn't my main point.
I like to play a little game instead, which I almost described in that earlier post. Having watched the AOs long enough to have a fairly good understanding of some aspects of what's going on I can usually predict, with about 95% accuracy, whether the weather in 24-48hrs will be a whiteout or rainy, by observing the spray patterns and intensity....
Geoengineering/hard science. Oh dear, here we go again! I'm being dragged from a casual interest in mysterious white lines in the sky towards geoengineering in one fell swoop. “Oh my God. You mean, like , like a Genesis terra-forming project or something? Should I make a hat?” Give 'em chance to keep up! You're pushing in the right direction for sure but if you push some of them over it'll slow the others. You know it makes sense. Prepare the ground and plant the seed. It'll grow. Tug the plant towards the light and it might snap off.
Same with military involvement too. As a skeptic I'm not looking to be told my military is making me sick straight out. I want to know who owns these planes and I want to know where they take off and land so I can show others. Pics of aircraft is the key point here I think. A thread with the best, clear examples we can find. I have a pretty good white/red/red example, but my “professional aerosol investigators kit” only comprises a bottom-end digital camera and a pair of binos, so good close-up shots require masterful juggling and a steady hand.
That said, docs like the “Owning the weather by 2025” have a place, but alongside other “Examples and indications contained in the official record”, such as the recent mentions in the British Parliament and more historical data such as the RAF weather modification experiment over Hampshire which led to the death of 35 people in 1952, rather than as some explicit and yet vague “it's the military” type approach. Let the truth take care of their conclusions.
Same with chemtrails in the media. Again, as a skeptic, I'm not prepared to accept that just yet. However, having looked through the examples of CT vs AO in the earlier thread I might be prepared to look at the later media related evidence with a more open mind. The blatantly AO pics first perhaps, then the “enhanced” ones, like the Miller ad, then the ambiguous ones like Microsoft and Netflix to highlight the blurring of the edges. I might write some sort of psychological piece to go with it - to flesh out the whole predictive programming, subliminal conditioning arena for those who want to know more. In my experience most people don't have a clue about this, but many are quick to recognize it once they've been talked through it – and as you are no doubt aware, it's a portal which tends to shed light on a host of other things at the same time.
One final thought for this evening (as it's late here). Faith in the ability of your students to learn for themselves is just as important as your belief in your ability to teach them something. It was only after I left teaching that I realised how important that was. You have to put the fruit on the table and let them eat, offering guidance only when appropriate, not as a matter of course. No matter how attractive the apple might look I'm always going turn away if someone tries to force it into my mouth.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests