r/chemtrails • u/doctorblue385 • 6d ago

Tracked flight. Not my content.

0 Upvotes

41% Upvoted

64 comments sorted by

13

u/TheRealtcSpears 6d ago

Holly Shit, they have airplanes that go in the air now!!

3

u/sh3t0r 6d ago

What a time to be alive

2

u/irrational-like-you 6d ago

No. Actually the big airplanes are spraying out smaller airplanes. He took a picture of it on his Nikon P900.

3

u/Commercial_Yogurt830 6d ago

Iā€™m still waiting for a video of two airplanes making babies.

-2

u/PhotoHtx 6d ago

why would the US Government be funding the monitoring of the stratosphere for the effects of Stratospheric Aerial Injection (SAI) it if it weren't happening?

https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/12/20/131449/the-us-government-will-begin-to-fund-geoengineering-research/

2

u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. 5d ago

First, because -research- IS happening.

There are multiple groups that are researching this and research has been going on for many years now.

Research does not equal mass implementation. And the research groups have all said there are too many unknowns (or have simply said they haven't gotten any successful validation of their tests).

The better question to ask yourself is - if it is happening, why would they publish the funds for monitoring but not the funds for the actual implementation? If it was secretly happening, wouldn't they hide the monitoring?

And since you can see the exact same kinds of trails across other countries across the globe, across different carriers, across different industries even (there are many companies involved in air travel), is it truly some massive global conspiracy involving TONS of people who all have been tight-lipped about it?

It becomes a conspiracy theory when you start making logical leaps that require you to ignore other possibilities.

1

u/PhotoHtx 5d ago edited 5d ago

I'm making no leaps that do not follow logic.. All I'm asking is why... And here's their own map of monitoring stations. And I'm noting that there sure are a lot of them around the world for something not implemented en masse. šŸ¤·šŸ»ā€ā™‚ļø

https://gml.noaa.gov/aero/net/stations.html

3

u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. 5d ago

The leap I'm referring to is taking the existence of monitoring sites (many of which have been around for many decades, by the way), and then assuming they are there to monitor spraying/chemtrails/geo-engineering that is happening.

If you're just asking why they exist, rather than assuming that their existence means geo-engineering is real, then I apologize for a wrong assumption on my part. It is a pretty common thing we see on here (X must mean Y).

For the record, monitoring stations study many things. You have to step back and realize that they define themselves according to their typical audience. You'll see words like "aerosol" but you have to see their use as a basic scientific description. There are many aerosols in the atmosphere (even dust is an aerosol). Monitoring stations will study them all, and distributed stations allows multiple points of collection data.

I just noticed you can click on any of those stations in your link and they have self descriptions of the things they study, and the information about the station itself.

1

u/PhotoHtx 4d ago

Yup i get it... I am distrustful of the denials as we have witnessed many cases of the government's and military's past experiments on an unwitting population from the intentional radiation exposure in St. Louis, to the syphilis experiments in Tuskegee on minorities, to revelations of the military releasing a virus in the San Francisco in 1950 in a bio weapons experiment - to the recent coverup of the covid origins... When we have two separate airforce whistle blowers coming forward claiming they were part of the geoengineering program of high altitude aerosol injection but were quickly dismissed as kooks by the media, I start wondering. Planes have been flying for decades.. Condensation trails have always been there, but i have personally witnessed over my house several high altitude jets leaving multiple intersecting trails that stayed and eventually dissipated into a hazy sky within hours. Now, I'm not saying that it's geoengineering, but I am saying that we must continue to ask what the heck it is. So I continue to ask questions. Why would some states outlaw geoengineering if it wasn't happening?

2

u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. 4d ago

government's and military's past experiments

I try to objectively consider whether past events truly reflect current or future events. It's easy to find ANY pattern in ANYTHING when you're looking specifically for one. But if you step back and consider the different factors involved, you see that there are vastly different circumstances around each event, different people (from different generations) with different attitudes, under different leaderships, with different goals, etc... It becomes much less of a pattern. I am not saying that it COULDN'T happen, but rather that past, unrelated events don't change the likelihood of whether it happens or not.

Also, FWIW, San Francisco wasn't the only time they did that. There were quite a lot of simulated attacks (of all kinds, including multiple "spray" simulations) to see where we were vulnerable during the cold war. They used S.M. (which is a bacteria, not a virus, by the way) in the San Francisco Sea Spray simulation because S.M. was already a common bacteria found in everyday fog, so people were already exposed to it all the time in San Francisco.

airforce whistleblowers

With whistleblowers, there are legitimate whistleblowers, there are also well-meaning whistleblowers who have bad information, and there are also people who just want to feel an ounce of respect or authority so they will lie to feel important for once.

Without knowing which specific whistleblowers you're talking about, I can't really comment on what kind I think they are.

However, regardless of who it is, I think all whistleblowers should have the same standard of providing some kind of verification of their claims. Otherwise, how would anyone ever be able to trust what they are saying?

I've only heard one such whistleblower, but they did not share any kind of concrete evidence or any way of verifying what they claimed. And they hid their identity and used a digitally-masked voice, so it literally could have been anyone at all.

There is one guy on the geo-engineering-is-real side who had a very short 4-year stint in the air force observing weather in primarily one location, yet he is interviewed as if he is an Air Force insider and an expert on jet engines (he isn't and he's made statements showing that he isn't). That kind of thing pushes me to make sure that someone is legitimately an expert with verifiable information before I trust what they are saying.

Why would some states outlaw geoengineering if it wasn't happening?

Without asking the legislators of each state, you and I can only guess.

It is, however, another case of X doesn't mean Y.

Personally, I don't believe geo-engineering is in progress but if I were a legislator, I would vote for such a ban for multiple reasons.

First and foremost, I'm elected by the people to represent the concerns of the people. And if the people who voted for me are concerned about it, then it is my job to represent them, even if I don't agree with the idea.

Second, even without oath-of-office-level of motivation, there is still simple selfish motivation - taking those concerns seriously leads to earning votes which keeps me in office.

Third, I can't presume to know everything so on the off-chance I'm wrong, the bill is there to make it illegal.

Fourth, there is little effort into enforcement. Unless someone can prove the trails are geo-engineering, i don't have to lift a finger to stop it. The burden of proof is still on the accuser.

Fifth, it's good optics ("I'm protecting our sky") and if other states are doing it, why not do it just as a statement?

From a legislator's perspective, there is virtually no downside to passing the law.

All that said, go look up the initial states that passed the law - Tennessee being the first, and see HOW it passed. You'll notice that nobody has evidence of it happening. Literally one of the Tennessee senators (Frank Nicely) was talking about how he was basing the bill on looking up and seeing trails above his house as if "angels have been playing tic-tac-toe."

You'll notice a trend in the discussion sessions of the bill - nobody actually has evidence of it happening. You have some that just see trails in the sky and say "that's geo-engineering," but they don't know.

Yes, there are absolutely more trails because there are more flights. Global warming increases the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere (not only is there greater evaporation during the water cycle but warmer air holds more moisture). So even though the air is still very cold at 30,000 - 40,000 feet, we have higher humidity overall across the entire globe.

Higher humidity leads to larger and more persistent condensation trails.

High winds (usually 150+ mph at those altitudes) will blow those persistent trails into haze.

We have all the factors that increase the number of the trails, the visibility and size of them, the persistence of many of them, and the spread of them into a haze.

It's not as sound-bite-ish as saying it's nefarious/suspicious geo-engineering but meteorology rarely is.

1

u/PhotoHtx 4d ago

I appreciate your thoughtful and informative responses dude. You make me think further as well which is what I aim for

2

u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. 5d ago

First, because -research- IS happening.

There are multiple groups that are researching this and research has been going on for many years now.

Research does not equal mass implementation. And the research groups have all said there are too many unknowns (or have simply said they haven't gotten any successful validation of their tests).

The better question to ask yourself is - if it is happening, why would they publish the funds for monitoring but not the funds for the actual implementation? If it was secretly happening, wouldn't they hide the monitoring?

And since you can see the exact same kinds of trails across other countries across the globe, across different carriers, across different industries even (there are many companies involved in air travel), is it truly some massive global conspiracy involving TONS of people who all have been tight-lipped about it?

It becomes a conspiracy theory when you start making logical leaps that require you to ignore other possibilities.

9

u/One-Swordfish60 Chemtrails Can't Melt Steel Beams 6d ago

https://www.flightaware.com/resources/registration/N450MB

This aircraft is owned by a trustee company for some rich asshole. Not Harvard's Solar Radiation Modification department.

If this Gulfstream IV has 24 seats in total, where the fuck are they storing the chemicals?

3

u/TheRealtcSpears 6d ago

Human shaped chemical bags?

Crash test dummies filled with turnthemgayacine?

3

u/One-Swordfish60 Chemtrails Can't Melt Steel Beams 6d ago

Now when they find the patent for that, I'll shut the fuck up.

-6

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

When did they claim it belonged to Harvard? From a conspiracy perspective it could be more of proof per se if it belongs to a rich person but that's just speculation of course.

7

u/One-Swordfish60 Chemtrails Can't Melt Steel Beams 6d ago

Im sorry, who the fuck else is currently studying Solar Radiation Modification? Do you have any idea what the sweet fuck you're even talking about? Do you know what kind of forces are at play here? Do some research.

-6

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

Grab a midol before you get a hot flash.

5

u/One-Swordfish60 Chemtrails Can't Melt Steel Beams 6d ago

Is fear mongering not the only language you people speak?

0

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

I only posted the videos. It's you and the other commenter's that endlessly parade around here acting like you have a PhD in climate science or nano particulars. If you don't believe in this stuff that's cool. Why you try to gaslight people who post things on a sub about the chemtrail theories is hilarious and sad. Nobody makes you come on here..

8

u/One-Swordfish60 Chemtrails Can't Melt Steel Beams 6d ago

No, this is a sub where normal people try to educate and/ or laugh at people who are too stupid to simply read up on "climate science or nano particulars" as you so eloquently put it.

I don't have a PhD. But I'm capable of reading the words written by those who do. Why do you act like you'd put more stock in my words if I had a PhD, when you spit in the face of the people who do, by propagating a grift that doesn't even make you money. Unless, of course, you have major ties to the oil industry. Your last name Exxon by chance? No? Then find something really wrong with the world to direct your anger at. Not fuckin airplanes.

1

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

If you really believe that's what this sub is for you're fucking delusional lmao. Again you're the only one directing any anger here. I respect your opinions and biases. You clearly don't respect anyone who doesn't agree with yours but that's also fine. Have a great day.

1

u/LuDdErS68 6d ago

If you really believe that's what this sub is for you're fucking delusional

That is exactly what this sub is for, you complete moron.

You clearly don't respect anyone who doesn't agree with yours

Science isn't opinion based, it's evidence based. There is NO evidence that any organs is using chemtrails to harm or control the public for nefarious means.

You are just wrong. Don't worry, nothing happens except that people will point and laugh and call you a conspiritard.

Deal with it. If you parrot bullshit without committing on it, you are basically agreeing with it.

1

u/sofaking1958 6d ago

But the entertainment value alone makes it worthwhile.

1

u/Confident-Skin-6462 6d ago

so you admit you can't prove any of your claims. noted and logged.

0

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

But you haven't disproved a single thing yourself so what are you even harping on about lmao

2

u/Confident-Skin-6462 5d ago

sounds like an admission you have nothing

5

u/Just-Wait4132 6d ago

I like how you hit the spot where you can't answer basic questions about the things you believe to be true so you pout

2

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

Just like you hit the spot rebutting me?

3

u/Just-Wait4132 6d ago

Homie what?

2

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

The original comment said do research. That's not a question. Then you come in after talking shit about how I have not answered the questions but there's no question and you offered no follow up yourself. You're not disproving anything either is my point, homie.

3

u/Just-Wait4132 6d ago

Do you think I'm the same person that you were just talking to? Lmao. There is a reason he's talking about Harvard and you don't understand it.

2

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

He basically lied and alluded the aircraft belonged to Harvard. Video nor me ever made that claim.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Confident-Skin-6462 6d ago

so you're sexist, too

ok trumper

2

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

Lol Trump is a clown

3

u/Confident-Skin-6462 6d ago

but you have no problem with me calling you sexist. odd.

6

u/Just-Wait4132 6d ago

Let's see, we have him starting a video with no way to verify he is where he claims to be. No welcome sign, no street signs, no identifiable landmarks. Just a location que he edited in himself. For all we know the tracking and this picture take place on opposite sides of the planet possibly years apart. And that's not even going into him supposedly taking pictures of an aircraft thousands of feet away, without a stabilizer, on a commercial camera that is using a standard lens. Not that we see him take the pictures as it just cuts to him viewing photos on a sim card, implying he didn't take those pictures he just uploaded them to a sim card and put it in his camera. Then he points out how they "clearly disengaged whatever they were engaging" dispite the fact it looks exactly the same as the first video.

5

u/BrownTownDestroyer 6d ago

I like this approach. Basically just question everything about the conspiracy video and then leave. I like to do this on Twitter. I'll jump into a thread and just blow up the op with allegations that they are cia psyops and pick apart whatever their post is about and then saying something like "real truthers see right through this facade". Then you just bail out and never reply to anyone and watch a they eat themselves alive

3

u/One-Swordfish60 Chemtrails Can't Melt Steel Beams 6d ago

Op here seems to be just another shill, shilling for Big Oil.

2

u/BrownTownDestroyer 6d ago

Real chemtrail truthers know you can't tell the difference between regular contrails and chemtrails by just looking at them, you have to do a chemo-nuclear momentum test to identify the barium deco oxidedrogency in the air after the plane passes to confirm. OP is absolutely a plant.

0

u/NameOk3613 6d ago

Excuse me sir for being naive, but what is "deco oxidedrogency"? It sounds like you have no basic understanding of inorganic/organic chemistry šŸ¤­

1

u/BrownTownDestroyer 6d ago

Secret lizard people chemicals. You wouldn't understand

7

u/Confident-Skin-6462 6d ago

whoever is the OOP is an idiot.

-5

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

Whoever you see in the mirror is an idiot.

4

u/Confident-Skin-6462 6d ago

i see you!

-7

u/doctorblue385 6d ago

Damn. Need to hit urgent care for that burn.

1

u/LuDdErS68 6d ago

Try some chemtrail liquid.

1

u/Zymoria 6d ago

That's not very nice. He didn't throw shade at you.

3

u/JoJo_Alli 6d ago

It doesn't matter, Confident skin is challenging doctor blue's beliefs, so if OOP is an idiot, and OP believes the idiot is right, OP takes that he himself is being called an idiot.

When you challenge a conspiracy to a conspiracy theorist you are challenging their belief system and their own identity.

1

u/Zymoria 6d ago

That's a fair way to approach it. As a representative of OOP, OP can feel personally attack with the insults. Through that lense, OPs retaliatory remark does seem justified.

1

u/Ocksu2 6d ago

Maybe doctorblue is the OOP.

The shade was justified, though.

1

u/Suspicious-Spinach-9 6d ago

Be careful my brother. Do some research. I heard that if you actually see the chemtrails turn into contrails you are in the most dangerous spot.

1

u/PhotoHtx 6d ago

Even the federal government is funding the NOAA to "monitor" the stratosphere related to geoengineering... why would an agency be funded to monitor it if it wasn't happening. Come on, people

https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/12/20/131449/the-us-government-will-begin-to-fund-geoengineering-research/

1

u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. 5d ago

First, because -research- IS happening.

There are multiple groups that are researching this and research has been going on for many years now.

Research does not equal mass implementation. And the research groups have all said there are too many unknowns (or have simply said they haven't gotten any successful validation of their tests).

The better question to ask yourself is - if it is happening, why would they publish the funds for monitoring but not the funds for the actual implementation? If it was secretly happening, wouldn't they hide the monitoring?

And since you can see the exact same kinds of trails across other countries across the globe, across different carriers, across different industries even (there are many companies involved in air travel), is it truly some massive global conspiracy involving TONS of people who all have been tight-lipped about it?

It becomes a conspiracy theory when you start making logical leaps that require you to ignore other possibilities.

0

u/lostinhh 6d ago

That's some funny shit.