PDA

View Full Version : New article linking NASA to Chemtrails



2002-Jul-01, 11:43 PM
Gentlemen,
I would like to direct your attention to an article that I found in an online magazine. The link is:
http://www.victorthorn.com/babel/issue64/nasa64.html
Let me know what you think.

RalphVanDyke
2002-Jul-01, 11:48 PM
As someone here said before, Babble is a good name for their magazine; they misspelled it though.

JayUtah
2002-Jul-01, 11:53 PM
This has already been discussed. There is no such thing as a "chemtrail". There is only the condensation at high altitude of the water vapor which is the expected by-product of the combustion kerosene or similar fuel.

And of course jet exhaust is pollution. In addition to water vapor it also contains carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. And the deposit of significant amounts of water vapor where it naturally wouldn't have formed will indeed have a meteorological effect.

All I see in your article is the clumsy attempt of someone to tack a very strained and predispositional interpretation onto a set of statements which has nothing whatsoever to do with spraying mind-control chemicals from the stratosphere.

Can we lay this to rest, please?

Tomblvd
2002-Jul-02, 12:07 AM
How many times does this have to be deleted?

JayUtah
2002-Jul-02, 03:58 AM
Notice how every time it's posted, it's posted by someone who just joined the forum here. They must really be desperate for readers over there.

WHarris
2002-Jul-02, 12:02 PM
On 2002-07-01 23:58, JayUtah wrote:
Notice how every time it's posted, it's posted by someone who just joined the forum here. They must really be desperate for readers over there.



Are we really sure that it's a "they"?

kucharek
2002-Jul-02, 12:24 PM
On 2002-07-01 19:43, John McCartney wrote:
Let me know what you think.


Reply (all R- or X-rated stuff deleted as this forum may be read by non-adults):





Now you know.

Harald

Rift
2002-Jul-02, 01:56 PM
How could ANYBODY read that NASA report on post 9/11 grounded air traffic, and think it has anything to do with 'chemtrails' at all???

Like STS60 said in another thread... maybe getting smacked by an asteriod would be a good thing...

JimB
2002-Jul-03, 02:52 PM
Since Bable didn't post a link to the original article/study by NASA, I did a little digging.

Here's the press release taking about the study:
http://www.larc.nasa.gov/news_and_events/inside_pages/2002/02-035.html
Doesn't say chemtrails at all. And it's all about water vapor changing weather.

Here's a press release about chemtrails:
http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/sass/usatoday_7mar01.html

Looks like a popular-news writer in over their head when the terms sound similar but the science is way different.

JayUtah
2002-Jul-03, 03:53 PM
Conspiracy theorists tend to see only two arguments: their own, and the straw man they've constructed to represent your counterargument. Heaven forbid you should actually muddy the waters with your own version of your argument.

Ms. Guliani seems elated that NASA has "confirmed" the existence of chemtrails. Apparently when we say, "There's no such thing as chemtrails," she thinks we mean that no white coulds come out of the backs of airplanes. Well, we can see them too, but we don't agree with her explanation of what causes them.

Abstractly, the conspiracist says,

"I observe X and I theorize it's caused by A."

We respond,

"No, X is caused by B, and here's the proof."

Because both X and A are described by the word "chemtrail" and both X and B are described by "contrail", we have to be specific which aspect of the word we're disputing. Her next statement seems to be,

"Aha! You admit the existence of X!"

This is how the moon hoax argument over radiation goes. It's very similar to the chemtrail argument. In the typical hoax believer's mind there are only two possibilities: the cislunar radiation environment is deadly hazardous, as they claim; and that cislunar radiation is "perfectly harmless", as we claim -- or so they think we claim.

And so when they find some news article or scientific paper that says, "There is hazardous radiation in space," they hop around with glee and say, "See, we told you so! How can you maintain it was totally harmless?" Or, like Cosmic Dave, they'll find some irrelevant scientific study and won't understand the issue sufficiently to know whether it's relevant.

Of course we don't maintain that the Van Allen belts or any other part of the cislunar environment is "totally harmless." There is a big difference between saying the danger doesn't exist, and saying the danger was adequately prepared for.

The hoax believers cannot differentiate an observation from their interpretation of the observation. And so they take a confirmation of the observation as a confirmation of their interpretation. This inability to distinguish fact from hypothesis is quite a serious cognitive impediment.

sts60
2002-Jul-03, 04:03 PM
This inability to distinguish fact from hypothesis is quite a serious cognitive impediment.
For my money, so is the inability to accept correction. (Symptoms include denial and hostility.)

Of course, many people have this problem, not just HBs. But HBs exhibit the additional symptoms of accusations of conspiracy-membership and responses which are quite orthogonal to the original topic.

SpacedOut
2002-Jul-03, 04:33 PM
On 2002-07-03 10:52, JimB wrote:
Here's a press release about chemtrails:
http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/sass/usatoday_7mar01.html


Two good quotes from the press release:



''This is blatant. This is in your face,'' says Philip Marie Sr., a retired nuclear quality engineer from Bartlett, N.H., who says the sky above his quiet town is often crisscrossed with ''spray'' trails.
''No one will address it,'' he says. ''Everyone stonewalls this thing.''


Typical CB thinking – “Either you’re with us or against us” - Patrick Minnis puts it better:



''If you try to pin these people down and refute things, it's, 'Well, you're just part of the conspiracy,'' says atmospheric scientist Patrick Minnis of NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. ''Logic is not exactly a real selling point for most of them.''


Applies in spades to the Apollo HB community!!!

Is this chemtrail nonsense just a US thing or is it world wide? I can see CD buying into this.

RalphVanDyke
2002-Jul-03, 04:42 PM
http://www.rense.com/politics6/chemdatapage.html

Looks like some in Australia as well as Canada, and even one from Croatia! Looks like the horrible killers from the US government really get around huh?

SpacedOut
2002-Jul-03, 04:51 PM
Amazing - If I say anything else TBA will ban me /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Waarthog
2002-Jul-03, 07:14 PM
Wow.

I have seen some vitriolic garbage in my time but this one is just... Words that are allowed on this forum fail me. If this is what passes for intelligent reporting on the subject no wonder they get nowhere. Bad logic, unfounded accusations, handwaving, and a conspicuous lack of quoting anything from NASA that might falsify their position. As stated before, so much like the HB crowd.
I have an idea, lets tell the HB's that the CB's (Chemtrail Believers) think we are spraying the moon for nefarious purposes with surplus Apollo equipment and sit back and watch the fireworks. I'll bring the marshmallows.

DaveC
2002-Jul-03, 07:52 PM
Not too many years back, when I was a kid (OK - it was a lot of years back) the government used to operate special facilities for people like this. I think "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" was a pretty good documentary on incarcerated CB's. Oh - it wasn't a documentary? Never mind. Must be the darn chemtrails confusing me.

Rift
2002-Jul-03, 07:56 PM
Chemtrail nonsense, in my opinion, is far more stupid then the moon hoax nonsense...

I, too, can't say anything on this board about chemtrails without being banned /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Bad physics, bad chemisty, bad meteorology, moronic reasoning...

Rift
2002-Jul-03, 07:58 PM
'This is blatant. This is in your face,'' says Philip Marie Sr., a retired nuclear quality engineer from Bartlett, N.H., who says the sky above his quiet town is often crisscrossed with ''spray'' trails.



Good lord... we have people like this in charge of 'nuclear quality'... how do stupid people end up in positions like this?

Donnie B.
2002-Jul-03, 08:15 PM
Well, since water is a chemical, I guess contrails really are, technically, chemtrails. Especially when you throw in the various trace combustion products.

But why are the CB's not out to ban running car engines on cold mornings? Same kind of "chemtrails"...

/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Peter B
2002-Jul-04, 12:28 AM
It's worth noting that Cosmic Dave has something on his site about chemtrails. According to that site there's a difference between chemtrails and contrails.

Incidentally, there's not much interest in chemtrails in Australia. The reason is simple. Australia has about the same land area as the 48 states of the USA, but a population of only 19 million. As there are only a few major cities in Australia, few air routes pass over other cities. So few people get to see contrails in the first place. One exception is Canberra, where I live. It sits under the route between Sydney and Melbourne.

jrkeller
2002-Jul-04, 04:28 AM
What I found so funny about this whole thing is that I've seen contrails for over 30 years and NASA has released Barium into the atmosphere for over 35 years.

For more information on these experiments check out NASA SP-264, titled, Barium Releases at Altitude Between 200 and 1000 Kilometers: A Joint MPI-NASA Experiment.

You should be able to find it at most university libraries.

Andrew
2002-Jul-04, 05:19 AM
"But why are the CB's not out to ban running car engines on cold mornings? Same kind of "chemtrails"..."

What about people exhaling on cold mornings?
When you breath out there's carbon dioxide and water vapour. Same chemtrails.

Peter B
2002-Jul-04, 07:00 AM
On 2002-07-04 01:19, Andrew wrote:
When you breath out there's carbon dioxide and water vapour. Same chemtrails.


And what's more, you're spreading the diseases the CBs believe are spread by planes flying overhead.

David Hall
2002-Jul-04, 08:13 AM
Now, to be fair, I can see how this whole chemtrail nonsense has come about. There has been a marked increase in air traffic over the last decade or so, and the appearance of contrails has become more common and pronounced. Even I, just looking at some of the photos these chemtrail people put up, find them a bit spooky.

So I can see how someone with a bit of a paranoid bent, and some unexplained sick feelings, can put them together to get a dastardly plot of some kind.

Still, it doesn't excuse them from not examining the evidence realistically or listening to counter-arguments. It's things like this (http://www.carnicom.com/af1.htm), taken from the link above, that are inexcusable.

Conrad
2002-Jul-04, 10:03 AM
<nervously>
What does a "nuclear quality engineer" do, exactly?

Can they still function professionally whilst also being completely hat-stand?

Apropos "chemtrails", I have lots of photos of WW2 aircraft in big formations spreading lots of "chemtrails" over the skies of Germany.Clearly the problem existed before NASA!
/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

kucharek
2002-Jul-04, 11:26 AM
Every CB should read this book:

Stanislaw Lem: The Futurological Congress

/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif
(Well, maybe they would call it "whistle-blowing"...)

Harald

widosm
2002-Jul-04, 11:27 AM
From http://www.rense.com/general5/chembarium.htm:
These spectral lines are visible under very limited time conditions near sunset or sunrise, when the sunlight shifts toward the red portion of the spectrum.

Am I just being stupid, or is waiting till the 'sunlight shifts towards the red portion of the spectrum' to see spectral peaks at ~720nanometres akin to shining a red light on a white car to 'prove' that it's red?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: widoxm on 2002-07-04 07:28 ]</font>

Donnie B.
2002-Jul-04, 12:39 PM
Got a laugh out of this one (from the Carnicom chemtrails site):

NATURAL HEALING for the Chemtrail Syndrome by M. Elsbeth

You know, I think the New Age healers have finally found something they really can cure!

kucharek
2002-Jul-04, 12:45 PM
I guess, these guys have a definition of Chemtrail Syndrome that is pretty different from ours...

JayUtah
2002-Jul-04, 02:46 PM
What does a "nuclear quality engineer" do, exactly?

Usually anything with "quality" in the job title means a quality control inspector. "Engineer" these days is added to anyone's job title (e.g., "food service engineer") so it doesn't necessarily mean someone with an engineering degree or certificate. The job title as mentioned is pretty ambiguous.

If the analogy to cars holds, the automotive engineer is the guy who designed your car and could bore you to death for hours talking about every technical feature of it. The automotive technician is the mechanic who fixes your car. His expertise is limited in some ways (he doesn't know the engineering equations and design principles) but valuable in others (he is aware of behaviors the engineers didn't predict). The automotive quality inspector is the guy who tests your vehicle emissions ever year.

Can they still function professionally whilst also being completely hat-stand?

Can they do their jobs? Yes, although the best quality control inspectors also have good reasoning skills.