0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The record is in the thread and it shows that you are the one saying that they both started 20 years ago and are starting now.
You haven't offered me any evidence.
Also, don't post videos of someone saying "This is possible" and pretend that it is evidence of the thing being done.
http://nuclearplanet.com/indjsrt.pdf
It's good that this person actually went through the trouble to get some data for his study. That being said, I see some inherent weaknesses in it. The article states that coal fly ash particles are filtered in power plants so that they do not escape into the air. However, I find it very doubtful that the filters are 100% efficient. It's possible that some amount of coal fly ash still escapes from power plants and contaminates rainwater. I don't recall the actual quantity of contamination being revealed in the study, but rather only elemental ratios.
Was the rainwater contamination significant or only trace? Can it be explained by residual power plant emissions or is the contamination too high for that? Is it possible to eliminate contamination from other sources such as volcanic ash, vaporized micro-meteoroids, and automobile exhaust as explanations? Are the absolute levels high enough to pose a health risk? Those are important questions that chemtrail proponents need to investigate scientifically if they want to persuade others.
Another issue is that the elemental ratios presented do sometimes differ significantly one from another. As an example, the ratio of sulfur-to-barium appears to be more than ten times higher in the coal ash leach water sample than in the San Diego rainwater sample. The boron-to-barium ratio is also about ten times higher in the leach water than the rainwater. The most concerning data, however, are the enormous range of the Internet rainwater values: the ratio of aluminum-to-barium differs by a factor of hundreds throughout the samples. The coal fly leach data is even worse, sometimes varying by a factor of more than 100,000. You can't come to much of a meaningful conclusion with such a highly variable data set. Chance alone can make two widely-varying data sets overlap, especially given that water has a finite solubility for different substances to begin with.
The big challenge that chemtrail proponents need to meet is to show that barium (or other) rainwater contamination comes from aircraft specifically. It needs to be shown that there is a correlation between aircraft flight times and locations and specific kinds of rainwater/air contamination. Alternative sources of contamination, such as power plants, need to be eliminated. Even if all of this is done, it still would not demonstrate that the substances in the contrails of these aircraft are put there specifically to engineer the weather.
The difference between the deliberate injections of metal oxides particles in the troposphere and the accidental escapeof coal fly ash is in the mechanical method used for dispersing the trace metals.Trace elements of Aluminium and Barium oxides in rainwater is a evidence of controlled solar geoengineering using metal oxides particulate matter.Never forget that solar geoengineering is patented technology!
The difference between the deliberate injections of metal oxides particles in the troposphere and the accidental escapeof coal fly ash is in the mechanical method used for dispersing the trace metals.
Trace elements of Aluminium and Barium oxides in rainwater is a evidence of controlled solar geoengineering using metal oxides particulate matter.
High data variations in coal fly ash mixtures probably confirms the organometallic origin of the trace elementsanalyzed.
Never forget that solar geoengineering is patented technology!
Condensation trails are normally seen in the upper atmosphere were the temperature is about -50 degrees C I don't think the temperature at ground level has much effect.
The contrail theory is pseudoscience because water particles doesn't condense without freezing.
Quote from: syhprum on 03/04/2017 22:58:47Condensation trails are normally seen in the upper atmosphere were the temperature is about -50 degrees C I don't think the temperature at ground level has much effect. Chemtrails are temperature independent. They can be observed in winter and summer. The contrail theory is pseudoscience because water particles doesn't condense without freezing.
Quote from: tkadm30 on 04/04/2017 10:54:46The contrail theory is pseudoscience because water particles doesn't condense without freezing. If that's true, then how is it possible for fog to form at temperatures above freezing? How is the classic "cloud in a bottle" experiment possible without freezing temperatures?
It would also be nice if you would answer our questions in regards to the coal fly ash study: how can a rainwater study determine if any contamination present is intentional or accidental?
You know- things like the infrastructure that would be needed to ship stacks of coal ash to military airports- sprayers on planes- well- actually anything would be a start?
I guess the vapor phase condensation of an aerosol mostly depends on its molecular configuration: Could it be possible that the "cloud in a bottle" experiment is still a combustion-driven (exothermic) reaction? (Hint: fire and water also produces smoke)
The process of a gas turning into a liquid or solid is exothermic (since it releases heat into the environment), but that's not combustion.
I guess the vapor phase condensation of an aerosol mostly depends on its molecular configuration: Could it be possible that the "cloud in a bottle" experiment is still a combustion-driven (exothermic) reaction? (Hint: fire and water also produces smoke)Thats a very interesting question. I'll try to find a intelligent answer to this and I'll come back to this question.