Chem-trails and con-news

As can be seen in the above readout of air pressure for December 2011 for Christchurch, just prior to the fairly large Xmas day earthquake there was rapid air pressure rising 20th-21st at the high end (above 1020mbs). Even though I do not live in Christchurch, I looked at my barometer from my home in the North Island, and without thinking too much about it remarked to a visiting friend it looked like earthquake weather. That's only because I have long noticed that air pressure rise at a certain speed, even at the other end of the country, correlates to earthquake activity in NZ, usually within 500kms of the hills, and usually also somewhere not too far from Christchurch because the district close to the highest of the Alps and therefore subject to the greatest vertical displacements of the daily Land Tide. I have come to the view that one is a sign, not a cause, of the other, and just one sign at that. For the same reason, Tibet gets more than its share of shakes, due to the proximity of the Himalayan ranges.

The trails are ice vapor in a high pressure zone, they are not evil. If you were driving your car behind a Boeing at 35-50,000 feet, where it is minus 60C, which is twice as cold as Antarctica is today, and looked behind you, your exhaust would be still hanging in the air, visible as a long thin trail across the sky. It would not make you an evil mastermind. The trails will be up there because high pressure is lingering where the planes fly, whilst 10 miles below, down beneath the earth, unaware of planes flying,  earthquakes still rumble, relieving stress built up by the very same electromagnetic effects on earth's magnetic field  that bring the high pressure to that part of the atmosphere. There is no way that a plane could fly in the dry ice zone altitude of the air without leaving a vapor trail from its exhaust. The trails are always there. But we can only see them when the intervening air is of high enough pressure to give us clear visibility from the ground.

Is there a difference chemtrails and contrails? If so, no one from the chemtrail community seems to be able to explain it. It is more likely the chemtrail idea is the spin placed on contrails by those who might not fully understand the science.  My question to is not an unreasonable one, how can you tell a contrail from a chemtrail? If there is little or no visible difference, from about 7-8 miles away, then how do we know for sure the one from the other? And if we don't know for sure, whilst accepting that contrails are harmless, then how can we justify getting alarmed? Some might say contrails are condensation and disappear, whereas chem.-trails are aerosol particulate which don’t go away but puff out and make a haze cloud.  But this is factually incorrect. Contrails CAN stay in the sky for a long time.

Con-trails can and do become clouds and last for well over several hours to over a day period. Clouds form by water droplets or ice crystals 1/1,000,000 of the size of a rain drop. Of course there are billions of cloud droplets that make up a cloud. Condensation nuclei are needed to form the clouds. Salt in the air and dust work for this. When the elevation 4-7 or 8 miles up in the sky where jets travel is moist during a warm front the contrails will normally stay for hours to over a day. When jets travel over the same elevations during a high pressure, the contrail may only last a few minutes or less than 10 or so minutes. It's up to the jet, its speed, its height and wind direction aloft, and a myriad of other sky factors.

This is standard stuff in the courses taught on meteorology in college. But there are several variations in high and low pressure which a plane can fly through at roughly the same altitude, which is why some parts of the trail may remain and some fade away, just as there are gaps in the clouds above you for the same reason.  So without a clear and obvious point of difference it is hard to see how anyone knows which trails to be concerned about. If a "chemtrail" and a contrail were side by side, could you tell them apart? What if they merged? Clouds don't form bearing convenient labels.

If "chemical" trails are true, what would be a purpose for spraying "chemicals" into the air? And why so very high? If the intention is to poison people, wouldn't topdressing heights of less than 2000 feet be more efficient? Secondly, if true, how do these "chemicals" not freeze solid at -60C and drop as solid chemical hail? Thirdly, how would "chemicals" cause earthquakes?  It seems that those who believe may not be allowing the possibility that whatever causes the contrails to be visible (high atmospheric pressure aloft) is also causing the earthquakes. We know that both increase together in the same time-fra me and yet other things also correlate - whale strandings, bird silence, strange animal behaviour, people getting headaches - which don't cause earthquakes but would be part of the same cause.  

Some have called  chemtrails, "fake-cirrus" clouds. It's as if these chemtrails have been designed to fool humans into thinking they are natural. But there is no such thing as a fake cloud. If you see it, it is a cloud. If something looks like a duck..you know the rest. A cloud is visible vapour. Even if it was a chemical concoction without H2O - if it is visible it is still called a cloud, never a fake one. That is our name for the sight. You can get clouds of ammonia in a test tube. Remember in chemistry at school, and the teacher saying, did the test tube go cloudy? The teacher didn't say "fake-cloudy". There is nothing necessary to make a cloud true vs fake, clouds are all true. And in this case the thickening into wider bands is just what ordinary regular water vapour clouds do.  

No one to date seems, in this age of instant cameras in cellphones, to have documented the loading of a substance into a container that is due to go on a high flight, or the actual  squirting  over the countryside. Why no photos? Ok, forget the photos. Has someone taken air samples at -60C and 30-50,000 feet and analysed the atmosphere just after a plane has shot by? The chemtrail-believers have said there have been many tests. I am asking for the validated evidence of just one. It is unscientific to say things have been done without some references and empirical analysis. Otherwise one could say anything, like walking backwards causes cancer, there have been "many tests done"..etc, a lot of scientists may testify that it happens (to get grants) and the final proof - a lot of people who have died from cancer would have often walked in reverse. I am not making fun of those who have tragically died from cancer, I am only using it as an example to point out logical flaws. Saying something does not make it true, even if a billion people said it all at once.

I'm not doubting for one moment the hardships and increased edginess the longsuffering people of Christchurch have been going through. But we are not discussing that. Science is science, and must be as valid for one person right in the thick of it as for someone reading about it from 1000 miles away.  It is incorrect to look up and declare, as if one could ever know for sure, that this cloud is the real McCoy, but that one is not. It's a chemcloud. See that children? That is our enemy. Children have already been abused with the pollution, CO2, rising sealevels, ozone hole and climate change fictions. Children these days think that if they don't turn lights off when they leave a room, the sea will rise behind the house and flood the world. They think if they don't recycle an aluminium can, or take to the dump every plastic bag they see, Antarctica will break up. Now they have clouds to have fearful nightmares about. Thanks parents, good job.

There is every shape of cloud under the sun possible. And you get a certain type that is cirrus during high pressure/earthquake times. There are more planes in the sky now than ever before, so there will be more contrails produced, because these are flying machines built by humans that have bigger and better engines that are putting more water vapour into the sky than in recent years. At higher altitudes this vapor forms lines. It is like going to the South Pole with a water pistol and firing it around. You will get lines of ice, no different to the other ice lying around, just a different shape. With more air services you will see more con-"chem"-trails on a daily basis for years to come. It does not necessarily mean that the evil masters are secretly stepping up their master plan to inject chemicals over us.

Basic school-science should be revisited. Any visible white emission is just water vapour. The products of fuel emission, for example: CO2, methane, CO3 and trace gases are ALWAYS INVISIBLE. If you can see it, it's steam. That means water vapour, nothing else. Even the diesel black smoke from a logging truck is just dirty steam, mostly water with unburnt fuel impurities to make it appear black. But that soot element is biodegradable and falls to the ground becaue it is heavier than air, as are all gases except methane and steam. The steam part of it just goes to join the clouds. If chemicals are mixed with the steam, either you would see them (silver iodide is pale yellow, nitrogen dioxide is reddish brown) or as for sulphur dioxide you would smell them(sulphur dioxide smells like rotten eggs).

When a diesel truck or bus goes by, the sky does not darken over. One can perhaps sympathise with the Occupy Cities movement, as there is a stated conspiracy by bankers worldwide to keep third world countries poor by denying them electricity generation. But I cannot for one moment believe the accusation made by the people who have decided that chemtrails are an evil plot, that world bankers do intend poisoning us, because if so then there would be no one able to supply taxes. Bankers and governments are not that thick! The rich need the poor, as many as possible, to keep them rich. 

If it involves the atmosphere, planes flying, clouds, ice, what we see through our vision, what we are affected by, it is all solid science. Whilst some things cannot be explained by scientists, science just means investigation and learning, and so even covers a spiritual realm. But science as studied in universities must encompass the scientific method and strict rules of gathering hard evidence, verifiable by independent observers in different locations. However, chemtrails are not the first thing that have had people fooled for a while before they worked out what was really happening. 

Trails from a jet high in the atmosphere are as harmless as the steam from the kettle, which is all it really is. I am open to investigating scams, but this HAARP one doesn't have legs in my opinion.  BUT, it could easily be part of another scam - a fictional story put out by western governments that there are countries whose regimes are manufacturing and spreading chemtrails etc., that intend to hurt mankind. Why? Because then the politicians can justify invading places that have oil reserves, on the premise that those countries have weapons of mass destruction.

They did it in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's why they are now pointing the finger now at North Korea, Iran, Moscow as possible "HAARP" bases of operation, and stepping up the angst against these nations, claiming that THEY are adopting aggressive stances. That's what Hitler did as the excuse to invade Poland. He actually faked an attempted attack on his own troops. But the last thing any of the western governments want you to do is analyse the science.

There are chemicals in the air from a variety of sources, carried by wind blown from the chimneys of many factories but also the results of eruptions and some chemicals occurring naturally. There is mercury in the ocean deep which gets into fish, but it is not all industrial.

The reader might also wish to ponder if we are being poisoned selectively, such that the chemicals sprayed into the air conveniently miss those who are involved in their proliferation, and their own relatives’ nostrils are successfully avoided. At stake appears to be aluminium, said to be being used in an underhand manner by the military, masterminded by HAARP or the world banking fraternity to reduce the global population. This is comic book stuff I thought I left behind when I grew up.

There is much talk of aluminium being the evil horrible nasty. This is news to those older scientists and chemists who know that aluminium is the third most abundant element on earth, and the most abundant metal. It is 8-9% by weight of the planet’s solid crust and occurs in just about everything. It occurs naturally in the environment as silicates, oxides, and hydroxides, combined with other elements, such as sodium and fluoride, and as complexes with organic matter.

Aluminium is released to the environment mainly by natural processes. It gets into the atmosphere via volcanoes and slowly drifts down. The literature on geoengineering would have the public believe that the atmosphere is free of aluminium until planes fly by, spraying it out. Aluminium was present in natural water, the air and the soil long before planes were invented. Aluminium enters the atmosphere as a major constituent of atmospheric particulates originating from natural soil erosion, mining or agricultural activities, volcanic eruptions, or coal combustion. No planes have to take off with tank-fulls of special nefarious solutions to get sizeable, measurable amounts of aluminium to occupy the air.

As anyone who has worked in marine or aviation environments knows that when weather is very unsettled, radar becomes blurry. Why? Radar only picks up metal. Yes, lots of aluminium gets  brought down by heavy rain. What happens then? The aluminium falls on gardens and so becomes present in foods, naturally. Foods naturally high in aluminium include potatoes, spinach, and tea. Aluminium, once absorbed, is distributed in most organs within the body, with accumulation occurring mainly in bone at high dose levels. To a limited but as yet undetermined extent, aluminium passes the blood– brain barrier and is also distributed to the fetus. Aluminium is eliminated effectively in the urine (WHO, 1997).

So please chem-trailers, do some more research. There is no indication that aluminium is carcinogenic. There is little indication that aluminium is acutely toxic by oral exposure despite its widespread occurrence in foods, drinking-water, and many antacid preparations (WHO, 1997). Of course too much of anything is bad – even too much pure water can be dangerous. But no one is being killed by aluminium, nor is there any need to panic when we see thin strands of cirrus. Rather, enjoy the message cirrus brings re-weather prediction, by reading any book on cloud shapes.

For all locations we lack documentation of earlier chemical levels to compare. To be able to say there is more now than before requires extensive archiving over time, using the same instruments at the same locations. This has not been done. If it had, then a lot of wild claims could instantly be disproved. For instance we know that Arctic ice was more depleted in 1922 than now. The world was warmer then than now. The data, well verified then, is available now. It is evidence like that that blows away global warming and climate change fantasies.