Chemtrails over Newcastle

[∂an]

I saw a very very suspicious plane over waratah about 8 weeks ago, not the normal high altitude chem/con trail planes. There was no doubt that it was spraying something. The trail did not persist but the plane was so low that you could see the engines and a seperate stream coming out of the wings. The plane was unmarked and silver.

 

There are two types of condensation trails, those due to engine exhaust and those due to compression effects (mostly induced by wingtip vortices).

The visible cores of wingtip vortices contrast with the other major type of contrails which are caused by the combustion of fuel. Contrails produced from jet engine exhaust are seen at high altitude, directly behind each engine. By contrast, the visible cores of wingtip vortices are usually seen only at low altitude where the aircraft is travelling slowly after takeoff or before landing, and where the ambient humidity is higher. They trail behind the wingtips and wing flaps rather than behind the engines.

 

Everything you describe fits the description of wingtip vortex contrail; lower altitude, trail not persisting, streaming out from wings.

Edited July 26, 2011 by kalika

[Slybacon]

Note taken.... However it did not appear to be coming from the wing tips. It appeared to be coming from the inner edges. It was the only time I have ever seen anything like it. The person with me said the same.

[∂an]

^^^ Guess I shouldn't discount it without observing myself, but I just find it uncomfortable when a conspiracy is used to explain something that may have a more 'natural' reason. Must be the scientist in me.

[Sallubrious]

I suppose I could be wrong Sly, I wouldn't think I'd make a 50% error though. I estimated 6k so for a plane to 9k it would indicate a 50% error.

Where did that quote about the supersaturation come from ?

I doesn't fit my understanding of ambient temperature in relation to the dew point.

When the dew point temperature and air temperature are equal, the air is said to be saturated. Dew point temperature is NEVER GREATER than the air temperature. Therefore, if the air cools, moisture must be removed from the air and this is accomplished through condensation. This process results in the formation of tiny water droplets that can lead to the development of fog, frost, clouds, or even precipitation.

So in my understanding the air can only be saturated at the time of temperature equalisation between ambient and dew point, this happens as the pressure drops when the air passes the wing of a plane and vortexes form etc, but rapidly normalises when the conditions creating the low pressure are gone causing condensation to evaporate.

My understanding was persistence could only happen when there is equalisation of the dew point and ambient temps allowing the moisture to remain suspended ie. similar conditions to cloud formation.

[Slybacon]

There are some references that indicate a contrail will persist if the temp difference is withing 5 C. Maybe somebody trained in climatology or a similar science will have a better answer.

Note the difference between dewpoint and temperature. As a GENERAL rule (although not gospel, because other factors may contribute) a difference of temperature -vs- dewpoint of above 5 degrees generally indicates that contrails will not persist. A difference below 5 degrees means that contrails probably will persist. Dew points, by the way, are calculated using relative humidity and temperature.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread675593/pg79

^^^ Guess I shouldn't discount it without observing myself, but I just find it uncomfortable when a conspiracy is used to explain something that may have a more 'natural' reason. Must be the scientist in me.

 

No, you are right. Without any photo or video evidence I can only rely on memory. It is plausable that it was a wingtip contrail. Just thought I'd make the comment so that people here are aware I am remaining open minded on the subject and looking at both sides of the evidence.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Slybacon

[Sallubrious]

It is plausable that it was a wingtip contrail. Just thought I'd make the comment so that people here are aware I am remaining open minded on the subject and looking at both sides of the evidence.

 

Same with the ones I posted about, they could well be just contrails.

At the altitude I'd estimated the contrail doesn't fit the bill, but if my altitude estimate was wrong and the supersaturation theory is correct then I'll admit I was wrong.

The reason I started looking into 'trails was to de-bunk all the chemtrail stories, but a few anomalies like this event happen from time to time.

[Slybacon]

^^ Is there a source one can find air traffic reports for a given airspace?

-Traffic

-Coordinates

-Direction/Heading

-Altitude

-Time

-ID

Edited July 26, 2011 by Slybacon

[synchromesh]

^^^ Guess I shouldn't discount it without observing myself, but I just find it uncomfortable when a conspiracy is used to explain something that may have a more 'natural' reason. Must be the scientist in me.

 

I find it uncomfortable when people don't do any research. Lapdogs of the establishment much?

Space Preservation Act of 2001

(B.) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--

(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;

(ii) chemtrails;

(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;

(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;

(v) laser weapons systems;

(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and

(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.

© The term `exotic weapons systems' includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space.

[Slybacon]

I find it uncomfortable when people don't do any research. Lapdogs of the establishment much?

Space Preservation Act of 2001

 

The thing is Syncro, If you really want to be on top of the "truth" you need to be able to disern the differences between a Con and a Chem trail. You don't want to be one of those guys that see's a trail behind a plane and just assumes its a chem trail without a proper understanding of "con" trail formation.

If you can discount any possibility of a con trail forming and persisting than you can explore the possibility of a "chem" trail and the motives behind such a possibility. We really need to regain some respect in our knowlege if we are going to convince people that there is a conspiracy taking place. That means justifying our reasons behind our beliefs and addressing both sides of the arguement.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Slybacon

[C_T]

the rain stopped on sunday, not started. That in itself tells a story.

Yes it rained tuesday to sunday, but thats no reason to be paranoid... hell i'm on a motorbike every day, i notice every weather change and have for years.

A week of rain in winter is not unheard of imo.

[HeroicDose]

Over Waratah Village - this looks very much like a chemtrail to me

 

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjDCtbGUF8E

Can someone please give me a comment on this video? It looks pretty suss to me but if someone can point out why it's normal than that would be great.

[C_T]

looks totally normal to me man, whats not normal about it???

its called a jet flying in the air? you know, burns fuel, fly's fast.

Edited July 26, 2011 by C_T

[synchromesh]

The thing is Syncro, If you really want to be on top of the "truth" you need to be able to disern the differences between a Con and a Chem trail. You don't want to be one of those guys that see's a trail behind a plane and just assumes its a chem trail without a proper understanding of "con" trail formation.

If you can discount any possibility of a con trail forming and persisting than you can explore the possibility of a "chem" trail and the motives behind such a possibility. We really need to regain some respect in our knowlege if we are going to convince people that there is a conspiracy taking place. That means justifying our reasons behind our beliefs and addressing both sides of the arguement.

 

What the hell? You totally insulted my intelligence there...

I'm just spellbound now... I don't know what to say.

[Slybacon]

Can someone please give me a comment on this video? It looks pretty suss to me but if someone can point out why it's normal than that would be great.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjDCtbGUF8E

If the plane is flying at the right altitude where the Pressure is high enough and the Temprature is low enough a contrail will form. If the dew point is within 5 C of the air temp (Generally, other factors taken into consideration) the contrail will persist and in some cases spread into a cirrus cloud.You can use this chart to determine if a contrail will form if you have the data on Altitude, Temp and Pressure. According to Appleman. This chart was created during the war to aid in Bombing planning to avoid detection.

This could be a con trail or a chem trail, without any data to make an assumption it is most likely a contrail, but it may be a chem trail. Another way of determining the difference is via spectro analysis. As the sun shines light through the moisture molecules certain frequencies are asorbed. The remaining frequencies (colour) can determine the chemical make up of the moisture. In this video it is unlikely anyone could determine this.

What the hell? You totally insulted my intelligence there...

I'm just spellbound now... I don't know what to say.

 

No one is insulting you Syncro. You are one of my favorite members. I thought you disliked people who DIDN'T do their research. Not open minded individuals who are willing to look at all possibilities. I don't possibly see how you could feel insulted.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Slybacon

[Alice]

No one is insulting you Syncro. You are one of my favorite members. I thought you disliked people who DIDN'T do their research. Not open minded individuals who are willing to look at all possibilities. I don't possibly see how you could feel insulted.

 

lol, I think Synchromesh was taking the piss dude.

Good to see the theories enhanced with data, this is turning into an interesting thread. It's not the sort of thing I would usually be interested in either.

[Sallubrious]

I just realised that the sounding data that I posted yesterday was for the 24 hours to the 24th July, so it most likely did not detail relevant data for the period in question, I should have posted data for the 24 hours to the 25th of July to get a depiction of the weather on the 24th, so I've been informed by someone who chooses to stay anon.

Anyway here it is

I've highlighted the line with the temp and dew point for a commercial flight flying at a common altitude to take the low atitude out of the equation.

94776 YSWM Williamtown Amo Raaf Observations at 00Z 25 Jul 2011

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRES HGHT TEMP DWPT RELH MIXR DRCT SKNT THTA THTE THTV

hPa m C C % g/kg deg knot K K K

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1018.0 8 9.8 6.1 78 5.83 0 0 281.5 297.8 282.5

1001.0 150 8.8 4.3 73 5.23 295 10 281.9 296.6 282.8

1000.0 158 9.0 4.2 72 5.20 295 10 282.1 296.8 283.0

969.0 420 10.8 1.8 54 4.52 289 22 286.5 299.6 287.3

952.0 567 10.1 1.5 55 4.50 285 29 287.3 300.3 288.1

925.0 806 9.0 1.0 57 4.47 270 23 288.5 301.5 289.3

892.0 1106 7.2 1.2 66 4.70 257 19 289.7 303.4 290.5

853.0 1472 4.2 -0.8 70 4.24 240 14 290.3 302.8 291.0

850.0 1501 4.0 -1.0 70 4.20 240 14 290.3 302.7 291.1

717.0 2857 -7.3 -8.0 95 2.93 275 23 292.4 301.2 292.9

701.0 3033 -8.2 -9.6 90 2.65 280 24 293.2 301.3 293.7

700.0 3044 -8.3 -9.7 90 2.63 280 24 293.3 301.3 293.7

646.0 3662 -12.9 -13.7 94 2.07 267 27 294.9 301.3 295.2

636.0 3781 -12.5 -15.2 81 1.86 265 27 296.6 302.5 296.9

635.0 3793 -12.5 -15.3 80 1.84 265 27 296.8 302.6 297.1

588.0 4378 -14.3 -34.3 17 0.36 245 19 301.3 302.5 301.3

587.0 4390 -14.4 -33.9 17 0.37 245 19 301.3 302.6 301.3

568.0 4638 -16.7 -26.7 42 0.76 248 18 301.4 304.0 301.6

541.0 5002 -19.9 -32.9 30 0.45 253 16 301.8 303.4 301.9

524.0 5237 -22.1 -31.1 44 0.55 257 14 302.0 303.9 302.1

508.0 5464 -23.9 -33.6 41 0.44 260 13 302.4 304.0 302.5

500.0 5580 -24.9 -34.9 39 0.40 255 14 302.6 304.0 302.7

451.0 6325 -29.5 -55.5 6 0.05 251 37 305.9 306.1 305.9

444.0 6435 -30.5 -56.1 6 0.04 250 41 306.1 306.2 306.1

400.0 7170 -36.9 -59.9 7 0.03 255 43 306.9 307.1 307.0

379.0 7539 -39.6 -61.2 8 0.03 255 43 308.2 308.3 308.2

356.0 7966 -42.7 -62.7 9 0.02 255 55 309.6 309.6 309.6

344.0 8196 -43.6 -65.2 7 0.02 255 61 311.4 311.4 311.4

300.0 9110 -47.3 -75.3 3 0.00 250 57 318.6 318.6 318.6

262.0 9996 -50.9 -80.9 2 0.00 250 55 325.9 325.9 325.9

250.0 10300 -51.3 -81.3 2 0.00 250 58 329.7 329.7 329.7

242.0 10512 -50.6 -81.6 1 0.00 250 48 333.7 333.8 333.7

218.0 11195 -48.5 -82.5 1 0.00 253 63 347.1 347.2 347.1

204.0 11630 -49.1 -83.1 1 0.00 255 72 352.8 352.8 352.8

200.0 11760 -49.3 -83.3 1 0.00 260 70 354.5 354.6 354.5

182.0 12374 -50.2 -83.9 1 0.00 270 68 362.7 362.7 362.7

166.0 12972 -51.1 -84.4 1 0.00 255 77 370.8 370.8 370.8

154.0 13460 -51.9 -84.9 1 0.00 259 73 377.6 377.6 377.6

150.0 13630 -52.9 -85.9 1 0.00 260 72 378.7 378.7 378.7

130.0 14541 -55.8 -87.8 1 0.00 265 80 389.3 389.3 389.3

113.0 15433 -58.7 -89.7 1 0.00 250 68 399.8 399.8 399.8

109.0 15659 -58.7 -89.7 1 0.00 245 61 404.0 404.0 404.0

100.0 16200 -58.7 -89.7 1 0.00 260 44 414.0 414.1 414.0

90.0 16858 -60.1 -89.8 1 0.00 275 50 423.9 423.9 423.9

84.9 17222 -60.9 -89.8 1 0.00 267 56 429.4 429.4 429.4

84.0 17289 -60.5 -89.8 1 0.00 265 57 431.5 431.5 431.5

78.1 17745 -57.9 -89.9 1 0.00 255 42 446.0 446.0 446.0

75.0 17998 -59.0 -89.6 1 0.00 250 33 448.9 448.9 448.9

70.0 18430 -60.9 -89.0 1 0.00 275 30 453.8 453.8 453.8

69.0 18519 -61.0 -88.9 1 0.00 280 31 455.5 455.5 455.5

66.4 18758 -61.1 -88.5 2 0.00 273 30 460.2 460.2 460.2

60.0 19397 -58.2 -87.7 1 0.00 255 28 480.2 480.2 480.2

54.0 20061 -55.2 -86.8 1 0.00 255 27 501.8 501.9 501.8

53.1 20167 -54.7 -86.7 1 0.00 267 25 505.4 505.4 505.4

51.0 20424 -56.4 -88.4 1 0.00 295 19 507.1 507.2 507.1

50.0 20550 -57.3 -89.3 1 0.00 295 21 508.0 508.0 508.0

49.0 20677 -58.4 -89.9 1 0.00 300 23 508.4 508.4 508.4

48.0 20807 -59.5 -90.5 1 0.00 285 23 508.7 508.8 508.7

45.0 21212 -59.0 -90.0 1 0.00 240 22 519.4 519.5 519.4

44.5 21282 -58.9 -89.9 1 0.00 249 21 521.3 521.3 521.3

43.0 21500 -56.4 -88.5 1 0.00 275 19 532.6 532.6 532.6

41.9 21664 -54.5 -87.5 1 0.00 283 17 541.3 541.3 541.3

41.0 21802 -55.3 -88.0 1 0.00 290 15 542.6 542.7 542.6

39.0 22121 -57.1 -89.3 1 0.00 255 10 545.8 545.8 545.8

38.4 22219 -57.7 -89.7 1 0.00 267 15 546.8 546.8 546.8

38.0 22286 -57.0 -89.1 1 0.00 275 18 550.2 550.2 550.2

37.0 22457 -55.3 -87.7 1 0.00 265 16 558.8 558.8 558.8

35.0 22813 -51.7 -84.7 1 0.01 315 19 577.1 577.2 577.1

34.0 23001 -52.0 -85.0 1 0.01 335 22 581.0 581.1 581.0

31.0 23598 -53.1 -86.1 1 0.01 295 23 593.6 593.7 593.6

30.0 23810 -53.5 -86.5 1 0.01 315 17 598.2 598.3 598.2

28.0 24253 -53.9 -86.7 1 0.01 300 23 608.9 609.0 608.9

24.0 25242 -54.9 -87.2 1 0.01 285 30 633.6 633.6 633.6

23.0 25515 -55.1 -87.3 1 0.01 305 30 640.5 640.6 640.5

21.7 25889 -55.5 -87.5 1 0.01 295 35 650.2 650.3 650.2

21.0 26098 -55.4 -87.4 1 0.01 290 38 656.6 656.7 656.6

20.0 26410 -55.3 -87.3 1 0.01 295 39 666.2 666.3 666.2

18.0 27084 -54.0 -86.8 1 0.01 295 33 690.5 690.6 690.5

17.5 27265 -53.7 -86.7 1 0.01 697.1 697.3 697.1

Station information and sounding indices

Station identifier: YSWM

Station number: 94776

Observation time: 110725/0000

Station latitude: -32.80

Station longitude: 151.83

Station elevation: 8.0

Showalter index: 2.23

Lifted index: 5.44

LIFT computed using virtual temperature: 5.40

SWEAT index: 118.02

K index: 26.50

Cross totals index: 23.90

Vertical totals index: 28.90

Totals totals index: 52.80

Convective Available Potential Energy: 0.00

CAPE using virtual temperature: 0.00

Convective Inhibition: 0.00

CINS using virtual temperature: 0.00

Bulk Richardson Number: 0.00

Bulk Richardson Number using CAPV: 0.00

Temp [K] of the Lifted Condensation Level: 275.20

Pres [hPa] of the Lifted Condensation Level: 896.45

Mean mixed layer potential temperature: 283.95

Mean mixed layer mixing ratio: 5.00

1000 hPa to 500 hPa thickness: 5422.00

Precipitable water [mm] for entire sounding: 16.01

 

To say temps and dew points would have remained consistent for the entire 24 hour period is a great stretch of the imagination though, but it does create doubt as to whether the 'trails in my pic were contrails. The 5 degree supersaturation window seems well and truly closed.

[Darklight]

^^^ Guess I shouldn't discount it without observing myself, but I just find it uncomfortable when a conspiracy is used to explain something that may have a more 'natural' reason.

 

I read somewhere recently ( like a civil aviation document ) that 25% of air traffic in .au is recreational. And it's growing.

Expect to see a bucketload of planes in weird places as this increase happens.

[synchromesh]

No one is insulting you Syncro. You are one of my favorite members. I thought you disliked people who DIDN'T do their research. Not open minded individuals who are willing to look at all possibilities. I don't possibly see how you could feel insulted.

 

Yeah, whatever dude. I post an official paper and a 4 hour documentary, and then you just act like I believe every contrail is a chemtrail... Bloody rude to say the least.

[mescalito]

I understand Slybacon's point dude,yours too...I guess the very word "Conspiracy" can be daunting to those that protest the idea....that's the point.....it instantly sub/consciously drives a reaction.It's a FEAR based mechanism

It becomes a Cliche' and whether or not you believe,take a little or are a De-Bunker,the point is it is ALL driven by the fear or acceptance that shit is going down.

No-one wants their boat rocked whether life is sweet or not so good.

As for Con V Chem...well you don't need to be a climatologist to know the difference, unless you are too young to remember what real condensation from the wings looked like and how they dissipate...or have some background in the physics of gases,which I do

We had a LOT of Chem-Trails over here around the same time as Slybacon,I took video and photo's.The trails would go from horizon to horizon,spread and more often than not the weather would change very rapidly.

One particular day after a good hammering from 2 planes,what was clear skies and beautifully warm and dry ended in rain within 2 hours!!!

On these "events" there would be ensuing itching,rashes,coughing,whezzing,lethargy,mood-swings......every time this happened,the neighbourhood dogs were first to react and start barking.....ALL through the night(planes would be late arvo) and the next door neighbours would fight.There was also a spate of break-in's and bashings at the time.

One weird thing was that one evening just as it was getting dark an almost gun-metal grey plane came over our house,it wasn't making much noise...a deep hum and it was at a very low altitude.

It was not passenger style,certainly not more than a 2 seater,but longer than I would expect.

The wings were tilted up and bent back slightly,no visible signs of particulate matter,though it was VERY low.

We haven't noticed them about for months,yet there are sill planes coming and going..so

As for tin-foil hats, no need!!..aluminium HAS been cast into the ionosphere,look it up and find out why one would do this.

I guess most y'all think the Fluoride in the water is Pharmaceutical grade and pure LOL !

It comes from Aluminium Smelters and by-products of Ag-Fert production.

[Slybacon]

Yeah, whatever dude. I post an official paper and a 4 hour documentary, and then you just act like I believe every contrail is a chemtrail... Bloody rude to say the least.

 

Syncro, your being paranoid. Don't turn against those that are trying to strengthen your position. You haven't shown you understand the difference by posting conspiracy video's, you haven't addressed the most valid points in this thread. Its all good and well to post 1000 video's and "official papers" but why don't we simply look for our self's. Its not hard. I'm disappointed in your reaction, I expected more from someone who is supposedly awake...... How can you expect people to take you seriously if you react like a teenager, this is why we have no credability and we can't convince anyone of shit. Why don't you try showing people you understand both sides of the 4000 hours of youtube vidz you post. This is my last reply to you if you are just going to continue down this path. I'm not getting dragged down.

Everyone on the chemtrail side of this argument except for a couple are just blahing on. There is nothing of any substance, just you tube video's and links to papers and crap. Why not try looking at some of the evidence provided locally that can be verified. No one has addressed sally-D's data or points. So far he is the only convincing argument. There is a strong bases for contrail formation for a lot of what you people are seeing. It's only now that we look at the data that we can really start to dig into the theories and possibly articulate them without sounding gullible or nutz.

Mesc, post some video's with dates and times. Then we can explore the possibilities. I'm going back to Sally-D last post to re think the situation........

Edited July 26, 2011 by Slybacon

[Sallubrious]

When presenting a view that doesn't fit the approved way of thinking like chemtrails the person with that viewpoint has to have enough scientific evidence to build a watertight court case, but any detractors just need to utter meaningless phrases like "tin foil hats" or "conspiracy theory" and that absolves them any need for even presenting a logical argument.

Every time I hear statements about tin foil hats, I interpret that as "I ridicule you for not thinking like me and I don't need to prove my case because I've imagined you have a tin foil hat"

Who are the sane ones now, the ones that investigate and seek answers or the ones who prefer to visualise others wearing foil hats and hang on to their security blankets?

There's no need to argue,just nitpick the facts in a scientific manner.

[∂an]

When presenting a view that doesn't fit the approved way of thinking like chemtrails the person with that viewpoint has to have enough scientific evidence to build a watertight court case, but any detractors just need to utter meaningless phrases like "tin foil hats" or "conspiracy theory" and that absolves them any need for even presenting a logical argument.

 

But the onus should rightly be on those who wish to promote 'alternative' hypothesis due to Occam's Razor. Attributing vapor trails in the sky to known physical phenomena is a more simple explanation than chemical spraying by unknown peoples for unknown reasons. So yes you need to provide scientific evidence for your view as the alternative is more simple and more plausible.

Edited July 26, 2011 by kalika

[Sallubrious]

But the onus should rightly be on those who wish to promote 'alternative' hypothesis due to Occam's Razor. Attributing vapor trails in the sky to known physical phenomena is a more simple explanation than chemical spraying by unknown peoples for unknown reasons. So yes you need to provide scientific evidence for your view as the alternative is more simple and more plausible.

 

I believe that Occam's Razor is the most plausible explanation for most of what we see, but it does not dictate that I shut down any analytical thought process and just accept everything on face value.

Occam's Razor cuts both ways and can also be applied to the anomalies that appear in many situations as well.

Try applying Occam's Razor to particle wave duality and see where you end up, it doesn't describe every situation, it is only a starting point.

[synchromesh]

Syncro, your being paranoid. Don't turn against those that are trying to strengthen your position. You haven't shown you understand the difference by posting conspiracy video's, you haven't addressed the most valid points in this thread. Its all good and well to post 1000 video's and "official papers" but why don't we simply look for our self's. Its not hard. I'm disappointed in your reaction, I expected more from someone who is supposedly awake...... How can you expect people to take you seriously if you react like a teenager, this is why we have no credability and we can't convince anyone of shit. Why don't you try showing people you understand both sides of the 4000 hours of youtube vidz you post. This is my last reply to you if you are just going to continue down this path. I'm not getting dragged down.

Everyone on the chemtrail side of this argument except for a couple are just blahing on. There is nothing of any substance, just you tube video's and links to papers and crap. Why not try looking at some of the evidence provided locally that can be verified. No one has addressed sally-D's data or points. So far he is the only convincing argument. There is a strong bases for contrail formation for a lot of what you people are seeing. It's only now that we look at the data that we can really start to dig into the theories and possibly articulate them without sounding gullible or nutz.

Mesc, post some video's with dates and times. Then we can explore the possibilities. I'm going back to Sally-D last post to re think the situation........

 

Good. I don't think I can trust you anymore anyway. I mean, why should I when your view has suddenly become this:

One of the best documentaries on chemtrails there is - a YouTube video

A government document labeling chemtrails as an exotic weapon which can effect the atmosphere - crap

Synchromesh - somebody who I ASS-U-ME hasn't researched weather anomalies for several years

[Slybacon]

I don't think I can trust you anymore anyway.

 

Who do you trust Syncro?

And more importantly....

Who trusts you?