Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A lovely afternoon to all of ye!

I have come here with an issue that's been sitting on my shoulders for quite some time now, and I was curious if anyone else has noticed or even researched this phenomenon known as "Geo-engineering", which is the deliberate manipulation of the climate via programs such as Stratospheric Aerosol Injections, which basically aims to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching this planet in order to slow down "Anthropogenic Global Warming" (a whole library could be written on this utterly controversial topic) via the injection of aerosols such as nano-aluminium and barium dioxide particles into the atmosphere to create an artificial "sunblock". This is discussed widely here: http://www.srmgi.org/

Sounds like something out of The Animatrix (wonder where those guys got their ideas, eh....? ), but it is happening on a global scale, without any public insight into the operations, not to mention, there has never been an official referendum regarding whether anyone actually wants to breathe in nano-particulates for the supposed "greater good of slowing down Global Warming", nor have the potential long-term effects of messing with the climate ever been researched...

Below are two examples of said "sunblock". Note the long streaks in the first photo, appearing to be persistent condensation trails left behind by airplanes. Soil and water tests have revealed alarmingly high concentrations of aluminium and barium in the soil, many times above EPA maximum safety levels, directly after periods of increased air travel and persistent condensation trails.






I know this all may sound quite odd and unbelieveable at first, and you may ask "why would the government/United Nations not tell their constituents about proposed plans to modify the climate and put it to a referendum" ?
Well, may I point ye here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience


I just wish to spread awareness of this phenomenon and see what others know about it. For more information check out these links below. All the best, fellow Dakkaites!


http://www.globalresearch.ca/atmospheric-geoengineering-weather-manipulation-contrails-and-chemtrails/20369

http://globalskywatch.com/

ah yes, my father informed me of this after hearing it from alex jones.... most people will simply deride it as tin-foil hat material but i could see it.. you might want to check out some of Alex's stuff at http://www.infowars.com/ you just might like that kind of stuff

Sorry, but anything from Alex Jones or infowars IS tinfoil hat material. He's either unbelievably stupid, or a fraud laughing his way to the bank by exploiting a gullible audience.


PS: yes, this includes everything in the OP. I'd list everything wrong with the OP, but I'd have to quote the entire post.

Is this seriously a chem trails thread? Or are my pain killers messing with me?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Is this seriously a chem trails thread? Or are my pain killers messing with me?

It's a chemtrails thread.

 Peregrine wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Is this seriously a chem trails thread? Or are my pain killers messing with me?

It's a chemtrails thread.

Whelp.

The place geo-engineering might end up playing in our response to global warming is a serious topic for conversation.


But this thread is cuckoo.

 sebster wrote:
The place geo-engineering might end up playing in our response to global warming is a serious topic for conversation.


But this thread is cuckoo.

This.

The high altitude aerosols are a real thing that's under consideration and debate. They're not being spammed by jets, because that's insane.

Side note: I thought the chemtrails nonsense was focused on "wharglbargle ILLUMINATI PLAGUES! whargl"? This seems to benign for a good conspiracy theory.

Gentlemen, before rushing to pre-conceived conclusions (obviously slightly exaggerated by Mr Jones, as he, well, makes a living off being alarmist, yet his issues have a solid foundation) and throwing "CONSPIRACY THEORIST" and "9/11WASDONEBYILLUMINATIALIUMZLAWL!!1!" through the room like a crazed monkey, it may be both informative and (dare I say it?) logical to study the issue a little more, beyond the deliberately spun and twisted hearsay making rounds.

Especially the stigma attached to the term "conspiracy", (which means nothing more than a covert plan being formulated by a group of individuals, which I am sure you often do too ) helps a lot to perpetrate the ever-so-popular "tinfoil hat" stereotype.

I am not saying believe it, or don't believe it, but please, don't just throw around the hearsay of others before you do some research.

"Is everything a conspiracy? No, just the important stuff." - Jeff Wells,




Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S.: I did not run across Alex Jones until years after I heard of Geo-Engineering.

 r3n3g8b0y wrote:
yet his issues have a solid foundation

No, his issues don't have any foundation at all. His "issues" fall into one of three categories:

1) Finding one tiny out of context detail and expanding it into OMG CONSPIRACY TO DESTROY EVERYTHING!!!!!!! rather than stopping to look at the context and figure out what is really happening (because he gets less money if he reveals the boring truth).

2) Hilarious ignorance of anything to do with science and engineering, including mindlessly repeating every bit of pseudoscience/fraud/whatever that happens to sound vaguely like something his tinfoil hat audience would pay to hear about.

3) Blatantly lying and making stuff up.

it may be both informative and (dare I say it?) logical to study the issue a little more, beyond the deliberately spun and twisted hearsay making rounds.

What is there to study? The entire concept is stupid, from beginning to end. But since I'm generous, I'll give you two places to start:

1) Find some science explaining how this entire plan works, and how blocking sunlight actually stops global warming. When you're doing your research pay attention to the actual surface area covered by the supposed chemtrails as a percentage of the total area of the planet, and the fact that clouds still absorb energy from sunlight and are not perfect mirrors. And then compare the supposed beneficial effect to the harm caused by having countless extra "airline" flights.

2) Airliners can't hold massive tanks of chemicals. There isn't enough space, there isn't enough cargo weight available, and you certainly aren't going to do it without everyone in the airline industry knowing about it. Google this little thing called "weight and balance" and how it relates to aviation. There you will find that airplanes have rather delicate center of gravity issues, and every single modification to their structure or difference in cargo loading is carefully recorded. And if you tried to install chemical tanks on them either you'd have to have every person involved (mechanics, pilots, supervisors, etc) fully informed and cooperating (and remember that even one person breaking their silence instantly destroys the conspiracy), or you would crash every single airline flight you tried to do it on.

Ok, I'll bite. Firstly let me list my credentials. I'm a weather forecaster with the United States Air Force. I've been doing my job for 11 years. My experience entails severe weather forecasting for the South East US, to forecasting in Northern Japan, multiple deployments to Krygyzstan where I've forecasted there, and for Afghanistan, and my current job here, as a Global Mobility Lead Weather Forecaster, that has me forecasting atmospheric conditions worldwide. While I currently only hold an Associates Degree in meteorological studies, I have been awarded over 80 hours of meteorological credits from an accredited university.

Now, from that pool of experience I will say this. Your post is completely and utterly bonkers.

Your first image, that of contrails, is a distinct meteorological phenomina. Certain conditions have to be met for their occurence, namely it needs to be colder then -40c so that the CO2 and H20 emited by the engines can interact properly. Outside of Cumulonimbus, clouds formed at that altitude are not the same as clouds closer to the surface. They are really ice crystals suspended in the atmosphere. A trigger is generally required to have the supercooled air condense and form those clouds, and the introduction of the warmer gasses by the passing aircraft can become that trigger.

Your second image is just disturbed air caused by differing levels of pressure. Notice the waves in the cloud? That's called turbulence. It's mixing the air up, and causing the water vapor to form a cloud.

Soil and water tests have revealed alarmingly high concentrations of aluminium and barium in the soil, many times above EPA maximum safety levels, directly after periods of increased air travel and persistent condensation trails.

This is complete and utter bs. If this stuff is being deposited at 35,000 feet, it is impossible for it to get to the ground and be measured to see if it is any actual chemical compound. Wind speeds at that level? They can be ranging anywhere from 35mph to 200mph. Most often it'll be 55-100mph. Anything "released" at that level would be blown so far away you'd never find out where it reached the ground. Gasses will also generally not sink to the ground from that level unless something helps it down. The most common thing like that would be rain. If aluminum large enough to fall to the ground unassisted was being released into the atmosphere, I can tell you that our radars worldwide would be going nuts because they'd be reflecting off of the aluminum particles. It would look like a radar image after an aircraft recently released chaff countermeasures to confuse radar guided missiles. Well, let me tell you what. I see contrails all the time where I live. A military base with more then 20 large aircraft that could create multiple contrails, and a good sized international airport about 30 miles away that does the same thing. I also monitor the radar all of the time, because it's my job. I never see any "aluminum" particles in the sky.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And please... please accuse me of being part of a global conspiracy. I'm a staff sergeant who makes about 55k a year, working a god awful job. There is nothing the government offers me right now that would get me to try to cover this stuff up.

Cloud seeding is about as far as weather control goes. And it's freaking expensive for little payback.

 djones520 wrote:
Ok, I'll bite. Firstly let me list my credentials. I'm a weather forecaster with the United States Air Force. I've been doing my job for 11 years. My experience entails severe weather forecasting for the South East US, to forecasting in Northern Japan, multiple deployments to Krygyzstan where I've forecasted there, and for Afghanistan, and my current job here, as a Global Mobility Lead Weather Forecaster, that has me forecasting atmospheric conditions worldwide. While I currently only hold an Associates Degree in meteorological studies, I have been awarded over 80 hours of meteorological credits from an accredited university.

Now, from that pool of experience I will say this. Your post is completely and utterly bonkers

Exalted

 djones520 wrote:
Ok, I'll bite. Firstly let me list my credentials. I'm a weather forecaster with the United States Air Force. I've been doing my job for 11 years. My experience entails severe weather forecasting for the South East US, to forecasting in Northern Japan, multiple deployments to Krygyzstan where I've forecasted there, and for Afghanistan, and my current job here, as a Global Mobility Lead Weather Forecaster, that has me forecasting atmospheric conditions worldwide. While I currently only hold an Associates Degree in meteorological studies, I have been awarded over 80 hours of meteorological credits from an accredited university.

Now, from that pool of experience I will say this. Your post is completely and utterly bonkers.

Your first image, that of contrails, is a distinct meteorological phenomina. Certain conditions have to be met for their occurence, namely it needs to be colder then -40c so that the CO2 and H20 emited by the engines can interact properly. Outside of Cumulonimbus, clouds formed at that altitude are not the same as clouds closer to the surface. They are really ice crystals suspended in the atmosphere. A trigger is generally required to have the supercooled air condense and form those clouds, and the introduction of the warmer gasses by the passing aircraft can become that trigger.

Your second image is just disturbed air caused by differing levels of pressure. Notice the waves in the cloud? That's called turbulence. It's mixing the air up, and causing the water vapor to form a cloud.

Soil and water tests have revealed alarmingly high concentrations of aluminium and barium in the soil, many times above EPA maximum safety levels, directly after periods of increased air travel and persistent condensation trails.

This is complete and utter bs. If this stuff is being deposited at 35,000 feet, it is impossible for it to get to the ground and be measured to see if it is any actual chemical compound. Wind speeds at that level? They can be ranging anywhere from 35mph to 200mph. Most often it'll be 55-100mph. Anything "released" at that level would be blown so far away you'd never find out where it reached the ground. Gasses will also generally not sink to the ground from that level unless something helps it down. The most common thing like that would be rain. If aluminum large enough to fall to the ground unassisted was being released into the atmosphere, I can tell you that our radars worldwide would be going nuts because they'd be reflecting off of the aluminum particles. It would look like a radar image after an aircraft recently released chaff countermeasures to confuse radar guided missiles. Well, let me tell you what. I see contrails all the time where I live. A military base with more then 20 large aircraft that could create multiple contrails, and a good sized international airport about 30 miles away that does the same thing. I also monitor the radar all of the time, because it's my job. I never see any "aluminum" particles in the sky.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And please... please accuse me of being part of a global conspiracy. I'm a staff sergeant who makes about 55k a year, working a god awful job. There is nothing the government offers me right now that would get me to try to cover this stuff up.

*froths at mouth* whatyousaymeansnothingbecauseyouaresimplypartotheconspiracyofcourseagovernmentemployeewouldtellusnothingswrong!!!...

/end whacko impersonation.


How'd I do?

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Ok, I'll bite. Firstly let me list my credentials. I'm a weather forecaster with the United States Air Force. I've been doing my job for 11 years. My experience entails severe weather forecasting for the South East US, to forecasting in Northern Japan, multiple deployments to Krygyzstan where I've forecasted there, and for Afghanistan, and my current job here, as a Global Mobility Lead Weather Forecaster, that has me forecasting atmospheric conditions worldwide. While I currently only hold an Associates Degree in meteorological studies, I have been awarded over 80 hours of meteorological credits from an accredited university.

Now, from that pool of experience I will say this. Your post is completely and utterly bonkers

Exalted

Manbearpig finds your lack of faith...disturbing.

 Frazzled wrote:
Manbearpig finds your lack of faith...disturbing.

He should hush before Al Gore finds him

I don't think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

This on the other hand, is crazytown.

Clouds tend to be persistant condensation at high altitudes.

Also, fun fact, burning Hydrocarbons have water as one of the products of the reaction. Who'd have guessed that a big engine running at high altitude would leave a vapor trail.

 r3n3g8b0y wrote:
Gentlemen, before rushing to pre-conceived conclusions (obviously slightly exaggerated by Mr Jones, as he, well, makes a living off being alarmist, yet his issues have a solid foundation) and throwing "CONSPIRACY THEORIST" and "9/11WASDONEBYILLUMINATIALIUMZLAWL!!1!" through the room like a crazed monkey, it may be both informative and (dare I say it?) logical to study the issue a little more, beyond the deliberately spun and twisted hearsay making rounds.

No, it isn't. It's a complete waste of time. Contrails have been a regular source of conspiracy nonsense for decades, as have secret UN plans (something that's never made half a lick of sense to anyone who understands the basic mechanics of the UN as a consensus government).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:
Ok, I'll bite. Firstly let me list my credentials. I'm a weather forecaster with the United States Air Force. I've been doing my job for 11 years. My experience entails severe weather forecasting for the South East US, to forecasting in Northern Japan, multiple deployments to Krygyzstan where I've forecasted there, and for Afghanistan, and my current job here, as a Global Mobility Lead Weather Forecaster, that has me forecasting atmospheric conditions worldwide. While I currently only hold an Associates Degree in meteorological studies, I have been awarded over 80 hours of meteorological credits from an accredited university.

Now, from that pool of experience I will say this. Your post is completely and utterly bonkers.

This is a completely beautiful thing.

Reminds me of the best post I've ever read on the internet, in which a young earth creationist attempted to start a debate, and spammed about two dozen bits of nonsense that supposedly challenged the current scientific consensus, and then concluded by asking 'any other thoughts or comments are welcome'. One fellow with an extensive scientific background went through every single claim, explained the actual science of each point and how it had been misrepresented or taken out of context by creationism, complete with links to major scientific publications (often the original article that spawned the creationist claim).

It was just a total and complete shut down. And at the end of it he replied to 'any other thoughts or comments are welcome' with;

"I fething hate you. And I fething hate everyone who's fed you such stupid nonsense."

It was magnificent.

I guess what I'm saying is that there really is a place for a good, honest put down in response to nonsense. And you post is a perfect example.

 sebster wrote:

 r3n3g8b0y wrote:
Gentlemen, before rushing to pre-conceived conclusions (obviously slightly exaggerated by Mr Jones, as he, well, makes a living off being alarmist, yet his issues have a solid foundation) and throwing "CONSPIRACY THEORIST" and "9/11WASDONEBYILLUMINATIALIUMZLAWL!!1!" through the room like a crazed monkey, it may be both informative and (dare I say it?) logical to study the issue a little more, beyond the deliberately spun and twisted hearsay making rounds.

No, it isn't. It's a complete waste of time. Contrails have been a regular source of conspiracy nonsense for decades, as have secret UN plans (something that's never made half a lick of sense to anyone who understands the basic mechanics of the UN as a consensus government).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:
Ok, I'll bite. Firstly let me list my credentials. I'm a weather forecaster with the United States Air Force. I've been doing my job for 11 years. My experience entails severe weather forecasting for the South East US, to forecasting in Northern Japan, multiple deployments to Krygyzstan where I've forecasted there, and for Afghanistan, and my current job here, as a Global Mobility Lead Weather Forecaster, that has me forecasting atmospheric conditions worldwide. While I currently only hold an Associates Degree in meteorological studies, I have been awarded over 80 hours of meteorological credits from an accredited university.

Now, from that pool of experience I will say this. Your post is completely and utterly bonkers.

This is a completely beautiful thing.

Reminds me of the best post I've ever read on the internet, in which a young earth creationist attempted to start a debate, and spammed about two dozen bits of nonsense that supposedly challenged the current scientific consensus, and then concluded by asking 'any other thoughts or comments are welcome'. One fellow with an extensive scientific background went through every single claim, explained the actual science of each point and how it had been misrepresented or taken out of context by creationism, complete with links to major scientific publications (often the original article that spawned the creationist claim).

It was just a total and complete shut down. And at the end of it he replied to 'any other thoughts or comments are welcome' with;

"I fething hate you. And I fething hate everyone who's fed you such stupid nonsense."

It was magnificent.

I guess what I'm saying is that there really is a place for a good, honest put down in response to nonsense. And you post is a perfect example.

not to derail an already ridiculous thread, but as a Christian, I have never understood the complete death-grip some of my own fellow Christians have on the young-Earth bit. I personally believe God created the Earth through the process of evolution over billions of years. He is the first cause of the big bang etc. etc. you've heard it all before. I never understood the resistance some people in the Church have towards mainstream science. Well, I take that back. I do understand because many people like to say that evolution disproves God etc. etc. Although I don't believe many conspiracy theories (Obama is not a secret Kenyan Muslim), I can understand why people believe in them in an increasingly complex and frightening world. It allows us to assign blame for the ills afflicting us without looking inward to our own failings.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
not to derail an already ridiculous thread, but as a Christian, I have never understood the complete death-grip some of my own fellow Christians have on the young-Earth bit.

Basically you take biblical literalism, and add in the courts ruling that you could no longer teach the bible as a subject in state schools. That politcally motivated a number of Christians, and motivated them against the field of study they suddenly perceived as being taught in the place of the Bible - science.

I personally believe God created the Earth through the process of evolution over billions of years. He is the first cause of the big bang etc. etc. you've heard it all before. I never understood the resistance some people in the Church have towards mainstream science. Well, I take that back. I do understand because many people like to say that evolution disproves God etc. etc.

True. Today much of the problem comes from atheists who are more anti-religion than anything else, who have simply taken up science as part of their anti-religion.

Although I don't believe many conspiracy theories (Obama is not a secret Kenyan Muslim), I can understand why people believe in them in an increasingly complex and frightening world.

I used to think something similar, but then I started to notice how much scarier the conspiracy worlds are. A world where JFK was killed by a secret cabal that remains in power to this day plotting against our democracies is much scarier than the idea that a nutter decided to do something stupid and the Secret Service didn't do their job well enough to protect the president. And a world where there's a secret government plan to release nano-particles into the sky that could be doing who-knows-what to our health is much scarier than world where, err, that isn't happening.

I think conspiracy theories exist for the same reason we tell scary stories around the campfire - because there's an adrenaline rush in being scared. And that adrenaline hit works much better when it comes from a simple to understand, straight up malevolent force like a conspiracy of secret plotters.

 djones520 wrote:

*SNIP* of an excellent post

101% true. The OP is pure tin-foil hattery. I'd list my related credentials, but they pale in comparison to djones520's expertise in this area.

I can't believe people believe this nonsense. Its up there with that viral video of the lady claiming there's toxins in the water supply that created a rainbow in her sprinkler.