Welcome
Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

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

Yes We Are Being Sprayed

tinfoil by association

Unread postby socrates » Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:01 pm

While trollbusting another Will Thomas source, I was led to a mainstreamish kind of environmental blog where the source was frothing.

Every strawman chemtrail argument was belched out. Myself, on the other hand, was able to post away and represent the chemmies as rational and sociable.

Another poster linked to one of the faked CPellatt versions. They have been kind enough to allow me to correct the record.

Some people just do not want to hear the word chemtrails. That is not too difficult a rule to abide to. That rule doesn't apply to this forum, but as a guest at their place, I had no problems with it. By being logical, I was able to get the link to this forum publicized. I was also able to plant some seeds.

Finally, I gently disagreed with their debunking of chemtrails as being a result of new turbine engines. This has been yet another small victory for this humble forum and its messages.


Here are my posts:


My feeling is that with global warming and ozone holes, we are up the creek. There are inadvertent butterfly effects already emerging due to industrialisation.

The problem is the status quo of pollution, or for this topic, atmospheric pollution. I think nature responds accordingly. Do any others agree that we need a complete overhaul of how the economy relates to energy use?

How do people feel about the new “weather mitigation” bills? There is a lot of chatter about atmospheric science, hydrology, and weather modification. How do we ensure full disclosure and accountability for such decisions? For example, why are we to trust Gel Tech Solutions, who are in the business of beating down hurricanes?

I feel our problems are so deep that we need to curtail NASA. We need a real peace in space. We need a green economy. If we ended war, think about all the money we’d have to do the right thing. Remember Jerry Brown? He said we could create jobs while saving the planet.





Thanks for the reply.

I am new to this website. From what I’ve seen so far, you seem to be trying to present high-minded ideas in easily digestible terms for the general population. That is a noble endeavour.

I just switched from high speed to dial up. Wow, what a difference. But I needed to find a way to force myself off of the internet. My point is, with high speed, there are no excuses for folks to not be able to figure a lot out, despite all of the misdirections, disinfo, and inane domains.

A few years back, I was on RealClimate for a few posts. It was on their now classic thread on geoengineering. I found that if people wrote logically and sincerely, that their posts were allowed to stay, and that they even would get decent responses. But when we couch things in other ways, we then leave the realm of discussion, end up tossing out the scientific method, and the result is usually friction, enigmas, and limited hangouts.

The geoengineers like to point to the cooling effects of Mt. Pinatubo, when the volcanic sulfur shot into the upper atmosphere influencing the radiative balance. Paul Crutzen, featured in a Rolling Stone article, is the dude who is well-known for his studies on the ozone holes and also for his plan/ideas about creating a sulfur shield. But he called for this to take place in the stratosphere. Most of our weather is occuring in the troposphere.

One of the other big moments in atmospheric history alluded to a lot is when the planes were grounded after the 9/11 attacks. I believe {from memory} that a scientist named Travis noticed that the temperature shot up a number of degrees. Thus, the idea was that some pollution could be good for us.

I agree with your analysis. We need to park the development truck, get out, and start walking away. One problem with the dumbing down of America {I can’t speak for other countries}, is that many Americans are defanged of their critical thinking skills and often are left with a blind allegience to the flag. How else is there to explain GW Bush’s approval ratings up until the year before the 2004 elections?

So instead of folks pondering about Enlightenment versus Counter-Enlightenment, of say Positivism versus Rousseau’s “Noble Savage,” we are programmed to respect authority. As Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance taught us, we have lost our gumption. We are always looking for others to fix things or explain things, etc..

When I looked into Gel Tech Solutions, by the way, I stumbled across Michael D. Brown’s name, you know, of “You’re doing a heckuva job Brownie” fame. Now I am not saying for sure it is the same guy, but it is the same exact name. So my point is, is cronyism and big business garnering too much power as regards to things that will impact our prospects for a healthier planet? I agree from what I’ve read that there is indeed little proof that the dyn-o-mat formula works. Even if it does, where is the accountability and disclosure? Where are the checks and balances?

There are certain things, imho, that don’t add up. Geoengineering has been shown to be dangerous by the majority of scientists. Gavin Schmidt and others seem to be arguing for us to not go there. So why all the chatter? If we go with Crutzen’s sulfur plan, what happens when the eventual volcanic eruptions add to a sulfur tipping point? Acid rain anyone?

What about the Star Wars missile defense? Wasn’t that outed as crazy thinking during the Reagan years? Then why does it seem like there is plenty going on concerning the militarisation of space?

It’s funny you mention google with NASA. Many have wondered if google is rigged or easily gamed. I don’t have the answer to that, but from experience, it does appear that one or the other is happening. Then I look at NASA. I see a lot of self-promotion coming out of their quarters. I think people need to realise that NASA is part of the military. I think too much money is put into it. They are now deeply tied in with atmospheric science projects. I am fearful that if our own leaders can get away with illegal wars, wiretapping, torture, etc., then how are we going to ever know what institutions such as NASA, the NOAA, UCAR et al are really up to?

Say NASA rockets are responsible for a good chunk of the ozone holes {correct me if I’m mistaken}. Then shouldn’t space exploration be grounded? My fear is, and to be honest, it sounds like we are on the same page, that instead of trying to change the society/economy to stop hurting Earth, the ptb’s are working to create band-aids.

It’s like with cancer and chemo. Chemo might give you a few extra years. If fortunate enough, if the cancer is in an early stage, then chemo might even cure you. But otherwise, most cancer patients are going to die as a result of the chemo rather than the actual cancer.

So money and human nature seem to be at the core of our problems. Instead of grounding NASA, we hear of plans to create ozone or sun shields. I think NASA is a propaganda outlet. I think they are living off of the good feelings generated by the 1969 moon landing.

Even though we may disagree about whether widescale “weather mitigation” has already started- some say turbo engines, I say I don’t think so- I think it is good that we agree that the fundamental structure of the economy needs to be reoriented to stop doing damage to the planet. Now how could such “weather mitigation” take place without public knowledge? Well, the military is now saying that climate change is a national security issue. That means they can do whatever they want to without full disclosure. How else could such activities go unchecked? Perhaps the easiest way would be to create a strawman messenger talking about weather wars, mind control, and even aliens!

I hope this post wasn’t too long. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to share my humble view of what is really going on.




Hi, thanks for letting me make the few posts. I respect your rules. If I could just add one more clarification for something I noticed from post #21 by Ike West. A link was given for an article written by Carole Pellatt. The article was lifted and perverted by [name removed by Moderator: TERRES.] Carole is a member of my humble forum. The real story behind this along with her original work as meant to be read can be found in the link in my username. Thanks for your time and consideration.



Don Harkin's name got edited out. That's ok. They allowed the link to remain to this thread, which pretty much sums up what happened.

My main point is we have to know our audiences when trying to spread the word. If people are averse to the idea of chemtrails, perhaps there are other areas like geoengineering or dyn-o-mat or weather modification that they are open to dialogue. If we understand our audience, we can tailor the message a bit.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Chemtrails, Climate Change, and CPellatt

Unread postby socrates » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:39 pm

I believe that AAANI is the only chemtrail website in the blogosphere which has presented a realistic explanation for the chemtrails.

People denying anthropogenic global warming are flat out wrong. No amount of propaganda is going to change the fact that industrialisation has led to a warmer planet.

The buggers have also blown holes into the protective ozone layer. That not only means increases in skin cancer, our whole fragile ecosystem is getting sauteed by uv-b rays.

The planet was warming up well before we ever started seeing chemtrails. I believe the chemtrails warm us up even worse and contribute to drought. The two main goals of the chemtrails, imho based on research and reflection, are to block out uv-b rays and attempt to tame severe weather.

I feel it necessary to explain as gently as possible that CPellatt is not an expert on chemtrails. This doesn't mean she isn't a good person. She is not a fake. She is not paid to post on the net. She has photographed chemtrails and wrote poetry around them. She has that video with The Who song. That's a good one. However, her emphasis on the military as the source of the trails, along with her ignoring of the climate change issues, leads me to believe that she has cornered herself with her theories.

She did an interview with Sofia Smallstorm. The audio isn't too good, so I didn't listen to it. Smallstorm works for the Republic Broadcasting Network. They have link to neonazis and disinformation websites. It's one thing to go on Far Out TV. It's bad enough that Rosalind Peterson, e.g., goes on Alex Jones and Freeman Perspective. But to go on a show with ties to neonazis? Yikes.


Would any progressive go on the Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly Shows? CPellatt should use the same discretion when choosing which interviews to do. This is nothing personal. This is not an attack. It's just how I honestly see things.

People want to link to Will Thomas? How am I gonna stop them? Are they willing to hear how he has plugged disinfo making us look bad? I doubt it. Few and far between have taken a real look at how chemtrails are portrayed as kookiness.


RBN Hosts

Most of the names I don't know. A few I remember seeing at the crazy Rense website, one of the big ones for "chemtrails information."

Frosty Wooldridge
Henry Makow

Those are rightwingers. Ever hear of Willis Carto? Ever hear of astroturfing? This isn't rocket science to see how the internet is rigged.

Michael Collins Piper


In the public forum, Last_Name_Left has some info on this. I added some too. I already took care of the Idaho Observer/Don Harkins mess as regards to CPellatt's chemtrail paper, which actually wasn't on chemtrails.

Alan Watt

Doesn't he have some crazy ideas about chemtrails?

Wayne Madsen

Double yikes.


All these names pop into my head in a free flow. Art Bell. Will Thomas. Scott Stevens. Rense.


Some warped twilight zone zeitgeist is being forced on us.



Without further ado, here is my take on Carole Pellatt's interview with New York Skywatch.


Cpellatt makes a great point, that chemtrails could be obscuring activities above. She tells of her photographs from 40,000 feet from her transatlantic flight to Italy. Unfortunately, there is no way to observe in a plane how these trails developed from their original emission point. Although, I did check out the pictureas. They do look like chemtrails having spread out.

I was disappointed not to hear about trails placed in the troposphere. I don't think she mentioned those. With the aid of the Appleman contrail chart, those are the easiest ones to question their status as real contrails. She makes a good point about the humidity in Arizona, how it doesn't seem to support the physics of contrails. We could use humidity readings for where the trails are located, not just the general number she provides. It is unclear where CPellatt gets her humidity readings, especially concerning the altitude.

Chemtrails are also not just being dispersed over population areas, as she seemed to allude to. That is a misnomer.

I do like her chemtrail story. It is a good narrative. She first noticed them around 2001-02. For about three years, she thought they were pesticide spraying. But over that time, she noticed that the patterns of the sky had completely changed. No longer were there the usual number of sunny days. As a photographer who liked to spend a lot of earthy crunchy time with her feisty beagle, she started to wonder...... to paraphrase......... those trails are too high up to be for mosquitos! And 150 days of clouds in this part of the US doesn't add up.


CPellatt had no power of suggestion. She didn't learn about chemtrails from the internet. She has been living in Phoenix for eighteen years and is well aware of what the skies used to look like.

On her trip to Italy, she felt like William Shatner in that Twilight Zone episode. She said there were strange frozen shapes on the window after flying through some serious chemtrails. People can check them out here. Those are good pictures of chemtrails. Make sure to enlarge the photos to really see them.


She said that after the plane went through a huge chemtrail, people started to cough. I don't know anything about that. We'd need to see some proof that outside air can get into a plane. If so, then perhaps that was an authentic connection.


The interview then went into CPellatt's penchant for looking at military reports. She advises to look at the budgets. One can see the ordering of parts concerning retrofitting c-135's for aerosol spraying. Here is where she gets it wrong again. Planes being retrofitted for that are not proof that those are chemtrail planes. The emphasis on the National Guard and the military in general also leaves the reader with no realistic idea of who is behind the chemtrails and why.

She spoke of the Indian Ocean experiment as proof that the ptb's admit to dispersing aerosols. Unfortunately, such institutions and people do not admit anything, except on the rare occasions like with NASA generating barium clouds. That is a real chemtrail story which can be sourced. No where with the Indian Ocean experiment is there any admitting of any kind of "aerosol spraying."



SCRIPPS INSTITUTION OF OCEANOGRAPHY
Scientists to Kick Off Major Field Experiment on Role of Aerosols in Climate Change

{excerpt}

"INDOEX scientists will document the chemical and physical properties of natural and human-produced atmospheric aerosols and use these observations to study and model the complex interactions among atmospheric aerosols, clouds, and radiative forcing of climate," said Jay Fein, program director in NSF's division of atmospheric sciences, which funds INDOEX. "The project is, thus, addressing one of the key remaining issues regarding potential climate change and will shed light on the effects of aerosols on climate. This knowledge is essential for improved climate forecasts."

The scientists chose the Indian Ocean region as the site for INDOEX because the Indian subcontinent and surrounding nations are rich sources for many kinds of aerosols, including those produced from industrial and auto emissions, biomass burning, and soil dust. With Asia's population rising at a dramatic rate, the amount of sulfur dioxide released is expected to increase.



I'm not saying chemtrails weren't involved with the Indian Ocean study. But we have no proof of such, and we definitely have no admissions of such at least for now.


As for stress caused by living near miltary airports, I'd suggest moving if at all possible.

By my saying that CPellatt is no expert on chemtrails, I am not taking away from her contributions. It is what it is. But I just felt a need to clear the air and emphasize again that if we cannot offer realistic theories as to why we are getting chemtrailed, people will be more likely to think we are blowing things out of proportion.

I await Rosalind Peterson's email. I've asked her how she feels about Arizona SkyWatch's denial of global warming.

I am actually ashamed that so few other "chemmies" have spoken out against the tinfoil and other misdirections.


I do not have delusions of grandeur. But I have figured out the chemtrails. It's about time people stop ignoring the relationship between climate change, the ozone holes, and chemtrails. Yeah, there are probably some military applications, remote sensing, enmod and obscuration. But we need to keep this real. As long as disinfo sources such as the Renses, Carnicoms, Will Thomases, the Wayne Halls, the Aubuchonts of the world, et al continue to define this story, we will be up the creek.


It has been established that chemtrails have been deliberately distorted as a topic as regards to the internet. The same was attempted with global warming, but that disinfo has failed miserably as more folks figure out who the sources are behind that specific disinfo.
Last edited by socrates on Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

LOOK UP, LOOK UP, LOOK UP!!!

Unread postby Crystal Rose » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:56 pm

I just discovered Carole Pellatt -- how out of it am I? :shock: A friend recently e-mailed some of her stuff.

I'll give her this: she really got me going. Her way of capturing how indignant we should all feel was exactly what I needed to wake me back up to the reality of how truly unacceptable this is. It's insidious, unacceptable, unbelievable, audacious, raunchy, horrible... I have too much brain fog to keep thinking up words to describe how truly horrible this is. Bless her for trying to help get the information "out there." HOW CAN PEOPLE NOT BE AWARE, HOW CAN PEOPLE NOT LOOK UP, HOW CAN PEOPLE BE IN SUCH DENIAL AS TO WHAT IS HAPPENING. It's just baffling to me. A couple weeks ago, I felt truly horrible for a few days, and I KNOW it was related to the "spraying."

Here is a copy and paste of some of what she has to say. Tell everyone you know about what you see when you LOOK UP and what you know. Let's get more people aware of how our rights are being molested. Maybe more of us need to get ANGRY. Righteous anger. Righteous indignation. We have every right to feel this way. Enough is enough.

"PLEASE READ THIS AND LOOK UP AT THE SKY
by Carole Pellatt

April 2, 2007
PLEASE LOOK UP AT THE SKY
LOOK UP
LOOK UP
LOOK UP

"My dear friends. This article is one I write with great emotion, confusion, and exasperation. It comes with such great weight that I had to dedicate some web pages just to this topic.

"The images presented in these photogalleries were taken by me. A few of them are from a few years ago, but the majority are from this year. Please look very carefully at these galleries of photos. Just click on the link "Today's Weather" at the bottom of the page.

"I am a sky watcher. I always was. As a child I did so to appreciate the clouds, colors, stars, planets, shadows, shades and textures of day and night. I’ve always spent most of my time outside, and when you do, the sky becomes a familiar place.

"When I moved from Canada to L.A., I would watch the sky fervently, always hoping to see a mountain range that was obscured by air pollution the day before. I am always looking up, whether in cities or out in the woods. And thanks to Zen-Master Coltrane, I observe the sky here in Phoenix at least three hours at varying times of day, every day of the week, 365 days a year.

"Four years ago, when I became aware of the aerial spraying of pesticides to help eradicate West Nile Virus, I became concerned about what the effects may have been, and would continue to be on my health. So I started watching the skies and fervently checking the Maricopa County Fogging schedule. For three years I’ve checked the schedule and observed the skies, checked my health and observed the skies.

"One thing I started noticing a few years ago were very unnatural looking clouds or plumes. I attributed them to the aerial spraying of pesticides, and in utter frustration at the complete lack of forethought on the part of our leaders, could do nothing more than watch. I photographed these strange clouds and kept checking the fogging schedules. My internal programming was so strong that it took me until the third year to admit to myself that these strange clouds were not corresponding at all with the fogging schedules, and they were showing up at strange times of day when fogging isn’t even done because of temperatures. They were also at altitudes that would be impracticle for fogging.

"I started noticing completely overcast days. Not cloudy days, just hazy days. Not air pollution haze, I know what brown or yellow particulate pollution looks like in any city-especially being an ex-Californian. I watch the Phoenix sky every day and night, and every day I have a great vantage point because I drive over Papago Butte, or chase rabbits with Trane in Papago Park. From there you can see as far as the eye can see (theoretically) to the East, West, North, and South. I continued to take photos. I observed cloud patterns laid up in a grid pattern. Very often creating an “X” or something resembling a tic tac toe board. When the wind blew, you could still see remnants of where the grid patterns started. These were not clouds like anything I had ever seen, in my past, or anywhere in the world.

"When I finally admitted to myself that this was probably not a pesticide induced haze, it started making me crazy because with all the research I do, I hadn’t run into anything that referred to fake looking clouds. It seemed too unreal and I had no conclusions to jump to, no power of suggestion.

"So, I started searching for any reference to haze, or clouds that obscure the sun on days when there are no “real” clouds in the sky. I continued taking pictures.

"I was shocked to find that people from all around the world had photos that looked exactly like mine-and as you will see, they have very specific characteristics. I saw identical sky photos from Australia, Italy, Germany, Britain, Japan, Canada, Bosnia, scores of cities and rural areas across Canada-from Montreal to Comox BC, from Washington, to Boston, Kansas, Malibu, the list is endless. But I was and continue to be exasperated that no one is talking about this, and most people aren’t noticing.

"It was obvious by the unnatural looking spray pattern that these clouds were being placed in the skies by airplanes. As I looked higher in the sky, I saw, and continue to see and photograph planes laying these patterns out. On some days they're not spraying patterns, but plumes that spread and become "clouds". Let’s not call them planes, they’re huge, let’s call them jets. And they’re out there just about every day, spraying aerosol mixtures into the atmosphere and creating fake clouds, in many cities.

"I read editorial after editorial written by people who feel alone and helpless. They are the few who notice. The few who take the time to look around and see beyond the matrix. And like me, they’re horrified at the prospect of the magnitude of this plan.

"The first thing I had to do was to learn what weather conditions create “contrails”, those white steamy lines in the sky that are sometimes left behind by jets. I encourage you to do the same. I also don't want to get into a debate with anyone over "contrails" versus "chemtrails". I've observed contrails for 46 years of my life, so there would be no reason why they would upset me now. Contrails are common occurences, even if they are longer than "temporary" (persistant), they are still contrails. What I am seeing is planes on a perfectly clear day, spray the sky continuously until there is nothing but a silver/gray haze bewteen me and the sun. And the most unrealistic looking clouds left behind all day into the night and if the wind isn't blowing, into the next day. So, if you feel that these things I speak of are contrails, perhaps you have not seen what I am seeing, and I would ask you to keep observing the sky.

"The sky at this writing is inundated pretty much every day with thick silvery plumes coming from jets in geometric patterns. I read, day after day, letters from people who feel so saddened and mortified and helpless and alone. To think that with all the sins mankind has perpetrated against the earth and himself, there are people out there who feel the world is owned by them, and they can decide to poison the earth and it’s inhabitants in plain sight and not even admit to it.


"I think the most important thing is that we must look up at the sky every day. Take pictures. And get people to look up and see what is going on. We must let kids know that this is not what the sky looks like. I’ve seen so many subliminal images of chemtrails that I believe when our generation is gone, the people who inherit the earth may not know what the sky really looks like. Chemtrails are showing up in school books, on news graphics, weather graphics, movies, and commercials. Please try to remember what the real sky looks like. And if you feel this article has merit, please pass it along.

"Get people to look up."
User avatar
Crystal Rose
tinfoil free
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 5:53 pm
Location: California

Unread postby cpellatt » Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:50 am

Hello, thanks for the discussion. I would like to clear some things up. So thank you for the opportunity. Thank you for all the positive feedback that was mentioned on this forum about my work.

Let me make it clear that I am not offering any proof of chemtrails. Please let's not get that wrong. I have never claimed to.

My philosophy at this point is not that I will offer proof that people are spraying the sky. As far as I'm concerned it's up to the corporate media and all the nay-sayers out there to prove to me that they are NOT spraying the sky. So, I don't spend any time trying to offer people proof or getting into head-on "yes they exist....", "no, they do not exist..." debates.

I know what's going up there and I have no time to deal with people that are so out of touch with what a real sky looks like that I would have to argue such a point. Therefore, when I speak of retrofitting C-153's with spray apparatus, I am not trying to offer irrefutable proof chemtrails. I am merely mentioning that they are spending millions of dollars retrofitting C-135's with spray mechanisms. I can also tell you that it wasn't me that went to the National Guard to point a finger. I read in more than one military report that spray missions belong to the AIR National Guard, and that info was corroberated time and again when I read budget requisitions and Armed Forces alignment papers. You can download many of those papers to study from my website. But they are long and you will be in for the long haul.

I do also mention chemtrails in the troposphere in more than one place on my site, but I can't tell you exactly where at this point. As well, there's only ONE place on my site where I mention spraying highly populated areas, other than that, it's pretty much a free for all, everywhere-populated or not and the photos of both populated and completely unpopulated sprayed areas corroborate that. So that may be the one spot you are alluding to. At the very beginning of my chemtrails website I mention tropospheric temperature, and it's used as my guage for discerning contrails from aerosol spraying.

I get all my temperature, cloud coverage, and humidity levels as archived in NOAA and NWS.

And I do have to say that it is obvious to me when you read the literature on the INDOEX Indian Ocean Experiments that aerosol spraying from airplanes was a huge component. I won't get heavy into it, you must do your own research, but let's start with the intention of the experiment as stated by the INDOEX INTERNATIONAL PROJECT OFFICE- www-indoex.ucsd.edu

"The aerosol forcing, both direct and indirect and due to both natural and anthropogenic
aerosols, will be determined for the Indian ocean during the winter monsoon season. The
measurement of this forcing will be accomplished as follows:

The primary focus of this component is the characterization of the direct and indirect
radiative forcing by anthropogenic and natural aerosols over the Indian Ocean.
As described in the USP there are three types of aerosol forcing flights (P. 26, P. 34 and
Fig. 19):

1) Radiation-Aerosol Gradient/profiling flights consisting of constant level flight during
the outbound route and top-hat style (Fig. 19c, P. 35) profiling return flight pattern. These flights
will yield horizontal gradient in aerosol forcing and a statistical data base for cloud and aerosol
properties in pristine and polluted air.
2) Aerosol Direct Forcing Closure flight during which the
radiative forcing will be linked with aerosol physics, optical and chemical properties.
3) Aerosol
Indirect Effect Closure flights, during which low-level clouds will be profiled for indirect effects.
The flight hour allocation for the C-130 are as follows:

Gradient/Profiling Flights: 60 Hours
Aerosol Direct Forcing Closure Flights: 20 Hours
Aerosol Indirect Forcing Closure Flights: 40 Hours

* Surface based calibrated measurements of aerosols, radiation, chemistry and soundings at Male and Mauritius (20.17°S, 57.33°E) will be a vital part of the field phase. Male will serve as the "control" for the polluted air, while Mauritius which is southwest of Maldives, will serve as the "control" for air entering the ITCZ from the southern Indian Ocean"

There's really a ton more info, but if you read the reports, it seems to me they are providing the "control" aircraft to simulate the aerosols they are studying and analyzing. If you go to these links, you can also find inventory, equipment, and transportation requirements. Of course a C-130 Stratotanker was used, as well as two other experimental aircraft. I don't know why a C-130 Stratotanker was given a priority rating of "# 1" (must have) in the instrument and equipment inventory listing for this endeavor when airports nearby were assigned already as refueling stations for the airplanes being used for chemical analysis.


www-indoex.ucsd.edu/publications/implementation/#implementation
www-indoex.ucsd.edu/publications/implementation/inst_table.html
www-indoex.ucsd.edu

There are many more aerosol and climate chemistry experiments listed along with INDOEX on this site, with the usual suspects, NOAA, SCRIPPS, MAX PLANK INSTITUTE, NASA, etc. You can decide for yourself, but you'll have to put the time into the research.

In regards to my emphasis on the military; show me some private jets, fleets of hundreds of C-135's owned by private corporations, flown by private pilots, and no publicly funded experimentation or inventories of jets, chemicals, fuel, and manpower, and I'll be believe the military isn't carrying this out. I'm not at all saying they are responsible, but they are carrying it out. So, it could be for the climate scientists and not at all for military purposes...but the military are still the ones carrying it out.

And please let's not even discuss the fact that I don't mention climate change. I don't mention day or night either, but that's because they are so obvious, they are not worth mentioning. I was studying climate change before it was fashionable. There is no doubt a relationship between climate change, the ozone holes, and chemtrails, however that is as potentially illusive a discussion as the military purposes for chemtrails. And quite frankly, the direct toxic effects of what is going on in our skies, in our soil, in our oceans, and in our lungs and bloodstreams, is of more dire urgency to me right now than discussions of climate change, which have become so convaluded, as to practically render the discussion impotent-which came first the chicken or the egg? And I'm hoping you read "HOW TO INTERPRET THE WEATHER AND PERCEIVE THE NEW HORIZON", from my website, it's about the drastically reduced amount of sunny days, with increased heat in Phoenix.

Now, last topic I will bring up, and for the last time. I'm getting really tired of having to take grief from anyone in regards to whose shows I do interviews on. And yes, I would show up on Rush Limbaugh's show if he'd shut his mouth long enough for me to speak, as do the hosts who's shows I go on. I have no affiliation to civilization in as far as the media, and labels such as "liberal", "conservative", or "extremist" go. It's like playing music, I play where there's an opening. And sure enough, I reach someone. And when people want to hear good music, they don't question the venue, they just appreciate that it's there.

I really don't believe any so called "liberal" talk show host has any more credibility as an intellectual than a biggot like Rush Limbaugh. They all sell mattresses, coffee, and gold currency on their commercial breaks. So I use the media as I please. If anyone wants to judge me for the company I keep when I speak of the truth, they are not listening to my message. Because the media is completely full of **** in any direction. I mean, to say that Sofia is any worse than any other talk show host on a moral level is to lose complete grasp of the depths of all of civilization at this point in history. Furthermore,to judge someone by what shows they go on is as absurd as judging someone by the brand of sneakers they wear. Especially when it's an interview that was never listened to. I could make a callous statement like, "well if you don't like the interview, move somewhere else." but that would be completely unrealistic, uncalled for, and as I said, callous.


And who is a "chemtrail" expert? There isn't one. Except the people that are doing the spraying. Because an expert would have offered irrefutable evidence as to the fact. Therefore I have nothing against Rosalind Peterson, or Bidget from Az Skywatch. I don't have to have some stringent irrefutable standards for what I believe are sincere people trying to expose a crime. I may not agree with all the stuff on their sites, but I have enough of a relationship with them that I know they are sincere in their frustration, and unlike most people, and not sitting there doing nothing, but are actively out seeking information. And I understand that well. I can talk to anyone on any side of the equation, and that allows me to get a lot of great information. I have no barriers to encountering people who could possibly give me information. Or better yet, make me understand directly or indirectly if something is false.

I'm not here to impress anyone. I make observations. I don't speak for anyone. I don't worry if what I wear, what I say, whose show I go on, or who I accuse is going to **** off some chemtrail debunker and make "chemmies" look bad. I'm not interested in being on my best behaviour so people will like us, or believe us, or listen to us. I will just keep saying the same things over and over again, as I have said them for years. "Someone is spraying the sky, I will tell you what I've noticed, what I've researched, what I've learned, who I've met", but I am not concerned with what stories people make up about me, what microscope they put me under, who they think I am, what gossip, which debunkers, or any other times wasting devices that come with reflecting the truth back to the public.

truly,
c pellatt
iseelines.com
carolepellatt.com
cpellatt
 

Unread postby socrates » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 pm

Thanks for sharing so much with this forum.

You are very clever to stay away from the closed-minded debunkers versus crazy believer run around. The proof is in the pudding. We have the proof. No worries there. It is quite annoying to try to get through to people with tunnel vision. But they can be spoonfed various things like the few news reports etc., they will at minimum see that thess are not outrageous claims we make.


Sorry about the condescending "she's not an expert" comment. I only meant that you are just a regular Jane like anyone else. Your story was pretty cool, seeing that you figured out chemtrails without any subjective ideas coming from the net. That is a precious connection. There is sheer logic to your testimony proving that chemtrails are not contrails.

I was just doing the normal disclaimer bit, a necessary function for all of us. I think it's cool that you go on these shows. I only point out the kooky flaws of some of the hosts, because it's a pitbull neccesity in order to get through to masses of people that chemtrails are contrails.

I don't think I am an expert. Well, maybe kind of. All of us are as close as it gets to experts. The ones who come across as experts, they seem to be to be copy and pasters more into global warming and commercial aircraft pollution than with helping put together a decent explanation for the mysterious trails.

As to the specifics behind which aircraft are involved, they do seem to be military in nature. Remember that guy I came across who was one of the mad fathers of enmod. I wish I had a better memory than this, but it appears to be a Dr. Evil hybrid between the atmospheric scientists and the military branches involved. This is being called a national security situation. The new weather bills by Udall and Hutchison appear to be about legalising the trails and getting funding.


Apologies too for misconstruing some of your ideas on the trails. My writing above was referring to the interview you did with New York Skywatch. I was wrong to jump to conclusions at times. Thanks for pounding out the nice post and clearing the air.

I guess saying we are not experts means we are honest people willing to work through this and find the best evidence and ideas.

Yes, there is no doubt in my mind that there is deliberate shenanigans going on with specific aircraft and their icky, fake, cloud making.


As to the humidity readings, it'd be nice to get them for the specific altitude with the temperature. There's got to be a way to prove that chemtrails are real. I think it's been done. Oh wait, I think that guy's name was Gordon Fraser MacDonald. {sorry if off with that} People should also check out the group called JASON.











And I do have to say that it is obvious to me when you read the literature on the INDOEX Indian Ocean Experiments that aerosol spraying from airplanes was a huge component. I won't get heavy into it, you must do your own research, but let's start with the intention of the experiment as stated by the INDOEX INTERNATIONAL PROJECT OFFICE- www-indoex.ucsd.edu



I hear you. I went through all that material too. Some of it is on this website. But when they are talking about aerosols, they mean Chinese industry, African dust, and the West's atmospheric pollution.



Gradient/Profiling Flights: 60 Hours
Aerosol Direct Forcing Closure Flights: 20 Hours
Aerosol Indirect Forcing Closure Flights: 40 Hours


This could be the closest we are getting to perhaps this Indian Ocean experiment involving chemtrails. "Direct Forcing Closure Flights" sounds suspicious.

I very much appreciate you sharing these links and ideas. People need to ignore the tinfoiltainment and try to get the big picture by checking out some pdf's, by looking at these usual suspects. Come on good people, you know a good source when you see it. We have the visual proof that chemtrails are real. We also have the motives.

I agree with you that chemtrails could be all about military aircraft being used for the atmospheric scientists and their special interests. Plus, there is a definite crossover effect between the military and those who think they are God with their crazy Dr. Evil ideas. NASA to me is the epitome of this hybrid. They try to put a smilie face on their activities, but I'm not buying it.

People do need to do some lifting with the atmospheric sciences, weather modification/mitiigation, etc.. They are encouraged to go through the top section to see the need to simplify this whole thing, to put our best face forward in exposing the program. Many simply do not want to believe this is going on.

We are both experts in that we have refused to keep our mouths shut about this injustice. Crystal Rose's line is we were not consulted.

This isn't Rumor Mill News or Chemtrail Central or Alex Jones frothing about the New World Order's weather wars. We are all showing the world that real people do exist outside of the rigged convolution who can show that more likely than not we are getting our asses sprayed. Enough is certainly enough.

Usual suspects, alright. Paul Crutzen is a big name for someone telling us how to spew pollution into the stratosphere. The toxic he recommends is sulfur. What a creep. I think he does his work at the Max Planck Institute. NASA is getting on my nerves. The NOAA is a big name in this. I think we are all on the same page. I think the things we have come up with are usually buried or non-existent at the major forums and across the web. It's a real shame I had to go into pitbull mode. But someone had to do it. There's a reason why we seem to still be at the drawing board for getting this **** exposed and stopped. To me, the problem is the internet.


It'd be interesting to get invoices on barium and aluminum perhaps other of the mentioned possible ingredients, to follow the money trail.


The thing about troposphere versus stratosphere, a Crutzen study said that ozone in the troposphere is much stronger at attenuating uv-b rays than that found in the stratosphere. That is a key nugget that has been buried. It is illusive to pin everything down for certain. I do think logical speculation can help though.


As for the drastically reduced sunny days in Phoenix, this should perhaps be one of our biggest selling points. Why is dry Arizona losing its sunshine? Not everything can be explained away as increased air traffic, new turbine engines, Chinese air pollution, African Dust, increased moisture due to global warming, etc.. I think your story is a good one, and I'm glad you had the fortitude to make sure it was heard.







I really don't believe any so called "liberal" talk show host has any more credibility as an intellectual than a bigot like Rush Limbaugh. They all sell mattresses, coffee, and gold currency on their commercial breaks. So I use the media as I please. If anyone wants to judge me for the company I keep when I speak of the truth, they are not listening to my message. Because the media is completely full of **** in any direction. I mean, to say that Sofia is any worse than any other talk show host on a moral level is to lose complete grasp of the depths of all of civilization at this point in history. Furthermore,to judge someone by what shows they go on is as absurd as judging someone by the brand of sneakers they wear. Especially when it's an interview that was never listened to. I could make a callous statement like, "well if you don't like the interview, move somewhere else." but that would be completely unrealistic, uncalled for, and as I said, callous.


That's ok. We can agree to disagree.



And who is a "chemtrail" expert? There isn't one. Except the people that are doing the spraying. Because an expert would have offered irrefutable evidence as to the fact.


I think this forum has done that. I think you have done that. It is fricken crazy up there with what they are doing. This is absolutely nuts and is a huge development from before around the year 2000.


Therefore I have nothing against Rosalind Peterson, or Bridget from Az Skywatch. I don't have to have some stringent irrefutable standards for what I believe are sincere people trying to expose a crime. I may not agree with all the stuff on their sites, but I have enough of a relationship with them that I know they are sincere in their frustration, and unlike most people, and not sitting there doing nothing, but are actively out seeking information. And I understand that well. I can talk to anyone on any side of the equation, and that allows me to get a lot of great information. I have no barriers to encountering people who could possibly give me information. Or better yet, make me understand directly or indirectly if something is false.

I'm not here to impress anyone. I make observations. I don't speak for anyone. I don't worry if what I wear, what I say, whose show I go on, or who I accuse is going to **** off some chemtrail debunker and make "chemmies" look bad. I'm not interested in being on my best behaviour so people will like us, or believe us, or listen to us. I will just keep saying the same things over and over again, as I have said them for years. "Someone is spraying the sky, I will tell you what I've noticed, what I've researched, what I've learned, who I've met", but I am not concerned with what stories people make up about me, what microscope they put me under, who they think I am, what gossip, which debunkers, or any other time wasting devices that come with reflecting the truth back to the public.




That's the vision for this place, and from the bottom of my heart, thanks for participating. We should be able to just spit out what we are thinking while doing our best to provide some good links and facts to back up our points. We are all chemtrail experts.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:21 am

I've thought about this a fair bit. CPellatt could definitely be a fake. She could care less that she is now affiliated with a network of nazis. She could care less that she is deeply associated with kookiness. I came up with a lot of info, and she has come up with her own unique style of paranoia and ********.

So CPellatt never had to write research papers? Because one can look at her work and see that there are zero footnotes. From memory, were the page numbers even given for her "bibliography?"

People can fool me. Yes, I can be fooled. Ultimately I figure it out.

I despise fakes. It is because of people like CPellatt, that chemtrails are looked at as kookiness. I am really starting to think this is a paid gig for her. And nothing she says can change the truth that she is a tool for the chemtrail fakes.

I take back anything nice I've ever said about her. She represents nothing but bad things for chemtrails awareness. I went out of my way to figure out who butchered her paper. It was Don Harkins and the Idaho Observer.

CPellatt represents kooky mind control, global warming denial, and being affiliated with kooks. I pointed out how some of her buddies are linking to Carol Palit, the look-a-like name, that lady who plays up the electronic warfare crap. CPellatt just acts like a spoo, acts like this is all water under the bridge. What a sad joke these astroturfers are. If there is a Giod, they will surely rot in hell.

CPellatt may be for real. But as time goes on, I tend to doubt it. A hippie lives in Phoenix? Not likely. A hippie goes on nazi shows and gets deeply tied to tinfoil? I don't think so. A hippie says she will be back, but never really returns? I don't think so.

CPellatt is the reason Busytown signed up here. Busytown is big into tinfoil and being a nutjob. She talked about Scott Stevens. She promised me chemtrail pictures. She provided nothing. All she came up with was one stupid thread on severe weather predicted for Maryland. Thanks a lot fake or nutjob!

These people are hypocrites. They are shallow. They don't keep their words. Their actions don't add up.

Birds of a feather do flock together.

You're fooling me no more CPellatt. Either figure out how you are such a tool, or good luck when you burn in hell.

As for the other internet trolls who show up here, especially on the public forum, your posts will be subject to deletion.

I am sick of all the fakes and posers like CPellatt.

There's nothing that can be said in her defense.

She reminds me a bit of Brad Friedman, who also likes to control others through the emails. They talk a lot, but ultimately they don't provide anything of value. What they provide is tinfoil by association for important issues.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Previous

Return to Chemtrails Are Not Kooky!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
suspicion-preferred