Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 17, 2018, 10:55 p.m. No.3948055   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8166 >>8267 >>8342 >>8443 >>8527

As a licenced A&P I can assure you that we do not maintain sprayers on aircraft. If you peruse enough old footage from WWII you will see checkerboard contrails hanging in the air. It's not a new phenomenon, it's as old as high altitude aviation.

As I stated in some of my posts, there is spraying being done for various reasons. However, my point is that every CONTRAIL that people see is not a chemtrail. 99.99% of contrails are just that, vapor trails from engine combustion.

The reason for this is because 99.9% of jet AC flights are commercial airliners, NOT spraying. Furthermore, not every military, NASA or CIA plane is a spray equipped aircraft.

There are hundreds of thousands of A&P mechanics that maintain commercial and civilian aircraft and it's inconceivable that they would maintain this kind of spray equipment and keep it secret. We do NOT, we are mostly conservative patriots, many are veterans that worked on aircraft in the service.

What people are seeing are almost always contrails. Any combustion engine produces huge amounts of water vapor from combining oxygen 02 in the air and hydrocarbon fuels H2, giving H20. The cold air at high altitude causes this moisture to stay a vapor that is visible like a cloud.

Water vapor only dissipates quickly when the air can hold it; if the air is saturated, near 100% relative humidity, the water remains visible. This is what a cloud is. ALL combustion engines produce water vapor. New aircraft engines are efficient so more vapor and less unburned hydrocarbon.

Different layers of air will have various moisture content and RELATIVE humidity depending on the temperature.

Moly, zinc, and lead are lubricants are lubricants in jet fuel, present as compounds. There is NO aluminum in jet fuel. Aluminum is one of the most common elements in the earth's crust, 8%, So if it is found in ground samples it is totally unsurprising. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium

Aluminum particles in jet fuel would destroy the fuel control system and the engine.

Barium is present in jet fuel at less than .3 ppm, which means for every 3 million lbs of Jet A-1 there is less than 1 pound of barium. Even that adds up, but then we must consider how widely dispersed it is and does it hover in the air to be blown out to sea, or fall to the ground.

Sulfur is naturally occurring in all crude oil, very difficult and not always necessary to entirely remove it from fuels. Since barium is so reactive it almost always occurs compounded with sulfur. The barium present may be the result of left-over sulfur.

The heat of combustion would certainly breakdown the barium sulfate and the result would be barium oxide and sulfur oxides. If the testers are finding barium SALTS and not barium oxide, it's not from burning jet fuel.

The parts per million seem pretty minuscule though. I'll bet most auto gas and diesel has similar PPM.

It is conceivable that after all these years of flying and driving that the tiny amount of barium present could build up enough to be detectable on land. Especially with how sensitive the testing methods have become.

Malicious spraying is not the same as normal aircraft operation. Face it, combustion is a dirty business. Some of these pollutants come from your car, they come from filthy manufacturing and smelting processes in China and India. Some is naturally occurring as mineral deposits.

Interesting that ground testers have not found chromium, copper, nickel etc. that are also present in tiny quantitys in jet fuel. Maybe they did but only were concerned with reporting the barium since it is more toxic.

There is no room for storage tanks and there are no spray nozzles on commercial airliners. Some airlines forgo painting their airplanes and do not hire fat flight attendants because the extra weight causes significant extra fuel expenditure over the millions of miles they fly.

We can't just point at the sky every time you see a contrail and think it's malicious spraying and shout chemtrail. We vilify a whole industry (and those patriots who maintain it) with incomplete knowledge.

I am not a shill, just more scientific than most. I think the idea of every contrail a chemtrail is part of CIA project Mockingbird, a psyop to mock so-called conspiracy theorists and discredit them.

Yes, I know about HAARP. I am an extra class licensed Ham Radio operator and was in Alaska when HAARP was built, I obtained the patent and studied it and understand about bouncing signals off ionized patches in the atmosphere, microwave brain entrainment and modifying the jet-stream.

 

It's Clown Science for the science impaired; allowing for more mocking of conspiracy theorists.

 

All that being said, the government is not above experimenting on the public. If you really want to freak yourself out read this page in it's entirety. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States โ€ฆ

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 17, 2018, 11:16 p.m. No.3948171   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8412

No one is saying there is no such thing as DEW. It's just not likely used to start forest fires or burn down houses. Kinda like blowing your nose with dynamite; there are easier ways. Microwaves would be a shitty choice to start fires anyway. I would go with infrared lasers. >>3948014

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 17, 2018, 11:30 p.m. No.3948234   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

Also, what might appear to be the "same trajectory" from a ground perspective could actually be at a different altitude. Sometimes a slightly different altitude will get you into a whole different type of air (Temp Humidity etc.) Have you ever rode a motorcycle and noticed the air temp change radically? >>3948166

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 17, 2018, 11:58 p.m. No.3948338   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8364 >>8403 >>8422 >>8557

I agree. We have been fucked with by the the Cabal for so long that we are ready to believe anything. And, there are chemtrails; they're just FAR more rare than most think and mostly benign. Pic is NASA SR-71 Blackbird with sprayer going, probably doing some kind of atmospheric research but it's NASA so who knows. >>3948267

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 18, 2018, 12:09 a.m. No.3948389   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8415 >>8465

Yeah, I just don't buy into every stupid conspiracy theory that the Clowns put out there to make us look like 'tards. I do my homework; and not by going to every clown inspired site on the net for my sauce. It's so bad now there are actually people dedicated to the idea that the earth is flat, how dumb does it get? But for the science impaired some arguments seem plausible. >>3948364

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 18, 2018, 12:35 a.m. No.3948498   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

If the science that I apply to maintaining aircraft were based on assumptions and dogma with no PROOF, my airplanes would fall from the sky or never fly in the first place. Don't let intellectualism get in the way of reality. >>3948478

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 18, 2018, 12:59 a.m. No.3948557   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

Since I work outside most of the time I actually get to look at the sky quite often. My point is not that there is no such thing as chemtrails, see >>3948338 this bread) but that they are exceedingly rare compared to all the contrails up there. Contrails can persist as long as a cloud might persist and for the same reasons. >>3948539

>>3948527

Anonymous ID: 6df47a Nov. 18, 2018, 1:01 a.m. No.3948560   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

Also possible to fly through different patches of air with different properties of relative humidity causing the contrail to modulate off and on. Much like riding a motorcycle through different temps of air. >>3948539