Planet X Confirmed By Carlos Muñoz Ferrada; Orbit, Speed And Size Reveals A Comet-Planet

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by Sidney (here)
Hey Nick, can I ask your opinion of why the sunrise and sunset are covered up 99% of the time with fake clouds?
This is a legit question, I am not trying to be a smart ax .

That's fine, a fare question, but you'll probably know what my angle is, that's why you asked. But it risks derailing the thread which jerry started about Planet X.

"Chemtrails" (if that's what you are getting at) have been very well discussed on Project Avalon in numerous threads already, so I doubt there's a need to start another one here.

"99% fake" is a sweeping statement. Nevertheless, to provide my opinion as requested; exhaust gasses from the increasing numbers of jet planes often seed cirrus clouds if atmospheric conditions are right.

Some days the skies are full and completely criss-crossed which spread and last for hours, some days just a few that last for a few minutes each, and some days none at all. This can happen at any time of the year. I understand it is dependent on air temperature, moisture content and dew point at 30 - 40,000 feet. But I am not a meteorologist, so we need to ask a pilot, or a meteorologist (a serious amateur of course) exactly how this occurs.

As I've suggested before, members of a pilots' or amateur metrologists' forums will be happy to describe the atmospheric physics and chemistry behind your question.

The cause of spreading vapour trails has always been known, but two events provided concrete evidence: the grounding of all flights (except a few military flights) over the US following 9/11 and the grounding of all flights over Western Europe from 15 to 23 April 2010 when Iceland's Eyjafjallajoekull volcano erupted. Cirrus clouds during both those occasions were very significantly reduced, proving that a percentage are indeed seeded by aircraft combustion products.

This is not to suggest I believe cloud seeding or deliberate weather modification is a fantasy. It certainly is not, and the technology has been experimented with and developed since at least the 1940s.

Nick

[Daphne]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

Posted by Daphne (here)
Ad Nick! I was referring to YOU not astronomers when I said I didn't want to debate with someone who hadn't spent time looking at the sky

Thank you for the clarification, but you have no idea how much time, or what equipment I have to observe the sky, both during the day and at night. Nevertheless, it's still astronomers, both professional and amateur, who are better qualified than either you or me to asses/explore/discuss/measure what's out there.

And as both buares and I suggest, please submit your observations and evidence to the relevant amateur scientific groups described in posts #46 and #54 for evaluation. If you have uncovered something important these guys will be thrilled to be involved in your new discovery and I'll be forced to eat my words. Will you do that?

Thanks.

Nick


PS: You may like to spend some time reading through the extensive post by Amzer Zo here where he (?) has gone to great lengths to collate all the myths and misconceptions about Planet X, Nibiru, etc. including some of Bill Ryan's exasperated comments on the repeated postings about this subject.

I did not assume that you did not go outside, but you have yet to even say if you've really looked. I have looked at some of the post and it's all well and good, but my EYES do not lie Nick.
All the written word in the world means very little to me in light of what I have seen over and over again. I see that your opinion is even more unmovable than mine, as I have said that if someone can show me how they can make the things in the sky look the way they do in any way I will consider it. I don't see you doing anything to investigate. Am I wrong about that? And I have not heard anything about the bill Ryan Px issue. Before my my time I guess. I answered an already posted thread Nick. What's the matter with that? Are you trying to censor me or yourself because of what Bill Ryan wants?

[Daphne]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

Posted by Sidney (here)
Hey Nick, can I ask your opinion of why the sunrise and sunset are covered up 99% of the time with fake clouds?
This is a legit question, I am not trying to be a smart ax .

That's fine, a fare question, but you'll probably know what my angle is, that's why you asked. But it risks derailing the thread which jerry started about Planet X.

"Chemtrails" (if that's what you are getting at) have been very well discussed on Project Avalon in numerous threads already, so I doubt there's a need to start another one here.

"99% fake" is a sweeping statement. Nevertheless, to provide my opinion as requested; exhaust gasses from the increasing numbers of jet planes often seed cirrus clouds if atmospheric conditions are right.

Some days the skies are full and completely criss-crossed which spread and last for hours, some days just a few that last for a few minutes each, and some days none at all. This can happen at any time of the year. I understand it is dependent on air temperature, moisture content and dew point at 30 - 40,000 feet. But I am not a meteorologist, so we need to ask a pilot, or a meteorologist (a serious amateur of course) exactly how this occurs.

As I've suggested before, members of a pilots' or amateur metrologists' forums will be happy to describe the atmospheric physics and chemistry behind your question.

The cause of spreading vapour trails has always been known, but two events provided concrete evidence: the grounding of all flights (except a few military flights) over the US following 9/11 and the grounding of all flights over Western Europe from 15 to 23 April 2010 when Iceland's Eyjafjallajoekull volcano erupted. Cirrus clouds during both those occasions were very significantly reduced, proving that a percentage are indeed seeded by aircraft combustion products.

This is not to suggest I believe cloud seeding or deliberate weather modification is a fantasy. It certainly is not, and the technology has been experimented with and developed since at least the 1940s.

Nick

Oh my God. I didn't think anyone believed that chemtrails are contrails anymore....this sheds much more light on your comments to me nick. You really are trying to discredit me completely. Why?

I just watched the planes do dashes in the sky Friday during the sunset! Boy, they sure better get their engines fixed if they are turning on and off during flight.

[Nick Matkin]

Oh my God. I didn't think anyone believed that chemtrails are contrails anymore... You really are trying to discredit me completely. Why?

What?

[Atlas]

Posted by Daphne (here)
Oh my God. I didn't think anyone believed that chemtrails are contrails anymore....

I do . While I don't dismiss the fact that there is evidence for global geo-engineering techniques and technologies, my opinion is that probably more than 90% of the so-called chemtrails shown on pictures on the web are nothing but contrails...

[Sidney]

Wow. Well, Daphne, LOL is about all I can comment at this point. Because I won't go to the chemtrail/contrail debate, nothing to debate IMO.
Keep documenting, and watching the skies when you can. Every day has a lesson eh?

[MorningFox]

Strange. You seem like an intelligent man buares. Surely you can see that many of these trails left behind by planes do not dissipate like contrails do. They linger all day, eventually fanning out to cause a haze in the sky. It's painfully obvious these are not vapour trails. There's enough evidence on the net to convince the hardest of sceptics that it's more than vapour, not to mention the evidence available from looking up in the skies. (Certainly where I live in London, anyway)

Some mornings ill watch planes go by, leaving a steady trail of vapour behind them which dissipates at the same rate that they fly at. The skies are clear. Other days I'll watch as planes leave trails across the sky that do not dissappear at all. They cover the length of the sky and over the hours they spread out causing pretty much complete cover. The sky has an unnatural haze that lingers all day. It's undeniable and happens fairly regularly.

[Atlas]

Sorry MorningFox but there is no scientific proof of chemtrails that I know of. If you can find one (and I mean scientific proof, not pseudo-scientific), I'll be happy to have a look at it and maybe change my mind but all I've seen so far is ignorance and fear mongering.

[Daphne]

Posted by buares (here)
Sorry MorningFox but there is no scientific proof of chemtrails that I know of. If you can find one (and I mean scientific proof, not pseudo-scientific), I'll be happy to have a look at it and maybe change my mind but all I've seen so far is ignorance and fear mongering.

Hi Buares,
I really take issue with the ridiculous assumption that scientific evidence is the only evidence and that it is incorruptable. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Do you EVER believe in hidden agendas or liars? I have recently been learning more about NLP and the art of trolling and I see deliberate attempts to make these claims like the scientific world is above reproach and everyone who doesn't get that is a fool. I am not calling you a troll. But I cannot understand your lack of eyes. Can we not trust our own impressions and ideas? Are we THAT traumatized by the programming we get that we cannot react otherwise when "experts" (whatever that means) tell us what we should do what we should believe and SHAME us when we think for ourselves. This is a much bigger societal issue in my opinion. It's the difference between mental slavery and freedom.

[Daphne]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

Oh my God. I didn't think anyone believed that chemtrails are contrails anymore... You really are trying to discredit me completely. Why?

What?

Perfect Nick
You are confused? Why? You don't seem to read my posts very well and focus only on things that you can use to discredit my thinking in a larger way. You come off sounding pompous and condescending.

How about what you didn't comment on in my last reply:
What about the planes that according to you must be having repeated engine shut downs in mid air when they make dashes in their contrails in the sky??? Follow the logic Nick. They are not shutting off their engines, are they? You know that planes cannot be turned in and off during flight, right? Are those skies going from one atmospheric condition to another every 2000 feet or so? (That's a guess in distance so don't focus on it to the exclusion of the REAL point as you usually have done here).
Come on, you can't possibly think that! Can you?
So I am betting your argument will be that you have never seen that condition of dashes across the sky, so it must NOT be true.
I will film it next time I see it (which is almost daily.) and post it.

Not once have you even answered any questions about doing your own homework and going outdoors to takie a picture of the sky and editing it to see what's really there. NOT ONCE.
I am suspicious of your motives, Big time.

[Daphne]

What is it about that sentence that you took the pains to remove it from your quote instead of just quoting my entire post (that's a lot quicker and easier)?
I am confused now......

The real quote was
Oh my God. I didn't think anyone believed that chemtrails are contrails anymore....this sheds much more light on your comments to me nick. You really are trying to discredit me completely. Why?

You took out the sentence "this sheds much more light on your comments to me nick"
That should be pretty clear that I see you as having an agenda
What's confusing about that?

[Nick Matkin]

Daphne,

Please don't get so het up, like that. It doesn't strengthen your argument. My disagreeing with you is hardly discrediting you now is it? Editing your post quote (by adding "..." to make it clear that's what I've done) was to highlight that to me it just didn't make sense. Your original post still stands as you wrote it

No doubt I come across as pompous and condescending when I'm reining back if I see incomprehensible stuff like this. You'll agree it's better than replying with anger.

Obviously we are all surrounded by lies and deceit from governments and big business, but sometimes one has to step back and consider the practicalities to this or that conspiracy. Sometimes to make a conspiracy actually work, so many layers of people, materials, transportation must be involved that it just becomes impractical.

And another thing; why does someone who disagrees with a conspiracy have "to have an agenda" as you put it? Some of the scientifically educated may think that people like you who see dark conspiracies everywhere also "have an agenda", which won't be fulfilled until we are all back foraging for berries and living in the stone age, dying of cholera and smallpox.

You are right, on this matter my mind is closed, not because I don't think conspiracies exist, but because I have looked at both sides of the argument, and my scientific/engineering background strongly suggests that it's just not possible on this scale.

Geoengineering has and does take place, but I don't believe it's on the scale you propose here.

As for the dashed trail you saw. I've done a bit of research for you:

The reasons that you have start-and-stop contrails is because the atmosphere is not constant and smooth; it's turbulent. It's pretty common to have one spot at, say, 35,000 feet where the temperature/humidity is at 40/100%, yet only a quarter mile away, the temperature is a degree or so higher, or the humidity is a percentage point less. Apparently that's enough to stop the contrail from persisting or forming. And an aircraft flying at 550 miles per hour covers that quarter mile in just a couple of seconds.

Anyway, why would they turn the jets on then off? To make it obvious? Why not keep the spray on? Why not do it at invisibly at night, or above clouds on overcast days? Or over the oceans where no one can see?

Probably you haven't, but I have asked seven meteorologists about this conspiracy. They'd all heard of it and all dismissed it as completely impractical on many levels. But then perhaps they are part of the conspiracy...

As far as I'm concerned the killer blow for the whole subject is the logistics of a such a massive spraying programme. To have this massive worldwide spraying would require thousands of aircraft, flying 24/7 shifts, with the additional support infrastructure, a God-knows how many pilots and ground crew, and the combined efforts of every employee at Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, BAE Systems, etc. etc.

You can't just sling tanks under a passenger jet without the pilot knowing the trim and weight was wrong. If it's mixed in the fuel, it'll damage the engines. Anyway, even if it didn't damage them, where in the fuel production and distribution would it be added without anyone noticing? It's all routinely tested by thousands of personnel in labs across the world for very good reasons. But then no doubt all these staff have been paid to keep quite, too.

Not only that, but the chemicals would need to be manufactured in massive quantities (where, and from what?) in plants staffed by employees. How are these plants kept secret? Then the chemicals must be shipped around the the world, and distributed throughout the county, without a single spillage accident, or without anyone wondering what is in all those trucks.

So you see where I'm coming from. That is my sinister agenda...

I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Nick

[Hervé]

Regarding this "chemtrails-contrails" psy-op, here is the best paper I have run into, so far:

Chemtrails? Contrails? Strange Skies

Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Sott.net
Sun, 09 Jan 2011 00:00 CET

© NASA, Contrails as seen from space: the fact that now the contrails persists for so long is in itself a sign that something is not going well, but it's NOT evidence they are "chemtrails."

A few things that should be considered when talking about so-called "chemtrails":

1) Obviously, there is some "spraying" that goes on and it's not for the benefit of humanity. I've heard a few stories from people about very low flying planes dispersing stuff that lands all over everything or makes people sick. And I do mean LOW flying.

2) Spraying that actually affects a designated area beneath the sprayer (the plane in question) must be at a fairly low altitude otherwise what is sprayed will not come down on the area beneath the spraying. This is due to the fact that our atmosphere has a number of layers and each layer has its own temperature and wind speed and direction, and very often, things in one layer take a very long time and distance to mix or mingle with other layers, IF they mix at all. Usually, the wind speeds in the upper layers are such that anything deposited there might only penetrate to lower, weather, layers, after many thousands of miles of travel. It's a very nonlinear situation and highly, [if not] impossibly, unpredictable.

3) So, if you are talking about chemical spraying that you can see above in the sky, that then falls on the area below it, you must be talking about low altitude spraying.

4) Therefore, trails that are very high in the sky that have no hope of ever interacting with the ground below them cannot properly be called "chemtrails" except, perhaps, if a chemical is being sprayed that is supposed to affect the weather (and even that is done fairly low). Cloud seeding is done by dispersing elements such as dry ice crystals or silver iodide in the atmosphere with an airplane or even ground based stations. Seeding clouds is believed to promote condensation of water droplets, thus, rain.

5) Cloud seeding is usually done TO clouds, it doesn't create them. Plus, it, too, must be done at a fairly low altitude in order for the effects to affect the area below the activity. Otherwise, the higher wind speeds in the upper layers will carry the silver iodide away, disperse it, and the desired effect will not be had. Here's a page about cloud seeding: http://www.sandylandwater.com/ops.htm

6) Small private planes fly at 12,000 feet maximum. Passenger airliners fly from 25,000 to 45,000 feet. The Concorde super-sonic transport cruised at Mach 2 at 57,000 feet. Miltary fighters get up to 80,000 feet, some specialty planes such as The U2 spy plane and the SR-71 are thought to go as high as 120,000 feet. the x-15 has a ceiling of 354,000 feet.

7) From Wikipedia:

A chart showing the atmospheric levels and types of clouds that forms at those levels. Click to enlarge

Cirrus clouds generally refer to atmospheric clouds that are characterized by thin, wisp-like strands, often accompanied by tufts, leading to their common (non-standard) name of mare's tail.[1] Sometimes these clouds are so extensive that they are virtually indistinguishable from one another, forming a sheet of cirrus called cirrostratus. Sometimes convection at high altitudes produces another form of cirrus called cirrocumulus, a pattern of small cloud tufts which include droplets of freezed water. The term is also used for certain interstellar clouds composed of sub-micrometre sized dust grains.[2]

Many cirrus clouds produce hair like filaments made of the heavier ice crystals that precipitate from them. These "fall streaks", a form of virga, often indicate the difference in the motion of air (wind shear) between the upper part of the cirrus cloud and the air below it. Sometimes the top of the cirrus cloud is moving rapidly above a slower layer of air, or the streak is falling into a faster moving lower layer. The directions of these winds can also vary.

Cirrus clouds are formed when water vapor freezes into ice crystals at altitudes above 8000 meters (26,000 ft).[3] Due to the sparse moisture at a high altitude, they tend to be very thin.[1] At this altitude, aircraft leave condensation trails that can turn into cirrus clouds.[4] This happens when hot exhaust, mostly water, freezes, leaving a visible trail. Streaks may appear straight when wind shear is absent, giving the clouds the appearance of a comma (cirrus uncinus), or tangle, an indication of high-level turbulence. The falling ice crystals evaporate before reaching the ground.

© Wikimedia Commons, A sky covered with cirrus clouds.

Cirrus clouds cover up to 30% of the Earth and have a net heating effect. Cirrus clouds efficiently absorb outgoing infrared radiation (heat) beneath them (greenhouse effect), while only marginally reflecting incoming sunlight (albedo).[5]

A high number of cirrus clouds may be a sign of an approaching frontal system or upper air disturbance. This usually signals a change in weather in the near future, usually becoming increasingly stormy.[6] Cirrus clouds can also be the remnants of a thunderstorm. A large shield of cirrus and cirrostratus typically accompany the high altitude outflow of hurricanes or typhoons. Cirrus clouds have also been observed developing after the persistent formation of contrails from an aircraft. Increase in air traffic is a possible cause of an increasing amount of cirrus clouds.[7]

8) Now, what is wrong with the picture presented above?

Answer: the altitude of cirrus clouds vs the altitude of many jetliners that criss-cross the skies with trails which are obviously much lower than the altitude designated for cirrus clouds.

YET the trails left by these aircraft ACT like cirrus clouds used to act at much higher altitudes.

Most logical (and scariest) conclusion: the cold layer of the upper atmosphere has gotten lower and probably thicker and therefore, more airplanes flying at lower altitudes are forming contrails in that icy air which used to be the much higher domain of cirrus clouds.

Because, again, if you understand about the layers of the atmosphere, temperatures, winds, etc, then you will realize that what is happening is NOT spraying of the human population or even intentional weather manipulation, it is the EVIDENCE that our planetary atmosphere has changed dramatically in the past ten years or so. More like 20 because that was when I began noticing the changes in cloud formation.

9) Also notice that the trails left by planes at much LOWER altitudes, generally dissipate quickly. What is bad news is that they leave ANY trail at all at those altitudes! (And knowing how layers that form cirrus clouds function from the above, you can pretty well understand that they are not spraying stuff on the ground below.) But certainly, there CAN be the natural formation of cirrus clouds by plane exhaust or fuel dumping AND low level spraying of "stuff" at the same time. I would suggest that such cases are "cover up" the same way the endless "gray alien abductions" are a cover-up for what aliens are REALLY doing on this planet.

For example, this very stupid video that is claimed to be "cloud seeding":


It is not. What it is is evidence that the atmosphere layer that the plane is flying through is very cold. Now, whether that is a problem or not depends on where and what time of year the video was made. In some cases, cold air that low would not be out of season, so to say.

10) Do these activities have any effect on the weather?

Undoubtedly they do. But that is not intentional. See above discussion of cirrus clouds where the net effect is HEATING of the atmosphere.

What seems to be happening is that the area of weather phenomena - the troposphere - seems to have been compressed by an expanding (or dropping) stratosphere and the stratosphere itself seems to have changed it's characteristics. THIS is VERY concerning! These are signs and symptoms, along with many others that we have chronicled on SOTT, that something very unusual is going on in our cosmic neighborhood because weather changes are taking place on other planets, too. I can guarantee you that they aren't doing "chemtrails" on Mars or Jupiter or Saturn.

11) If you study the work of James McCanney, you will come to the understanding that the 5 layers of the Earth's atmosphere are also layers of alternating electrical charge. THIS IS IMPORTANT. McCanney also discusses how these electric flows around and on the earth interact with the sun to create our weather/climate. Piers Corbyn is becoming famous for utilizing similar principles for far more accurate weather predictions than the mainstream climatologists are able to work up. The fact that Corbyn CAN predict the weather as accurately as he does argues against the "chemtrails" being a weather modification activity. His method is concerned with solar activity, not so-called "chemtrails".

12) Regarding these layers of electromagnetism surrounding the Earth, in 1958 some things were done that may very well have a strong bearing on the conditions of our planet in the present day. I would like for you to think about this in respect of climate change, so-called "chem-trails" and HAARP.

"Between August and September of 1958, the US Navy exploded three fission type nuclear bombs 480 km above the South Atlantic Ocean, in the part of the lower Van Allen Belt closest to the earth's surface. In addition, two hydrogen bombs were detonated 160 km over Johnston Island in the Pacific. The military called this "the biggest scientific experiment ever undertaken." It was designed by the US Department of Defense and the US Atomic Energy Commission, under the code name Project Argus. The purpose appears to be to assess the impact of high altitude nuclear explosions on radio transmission and radar operations because of the electromagnetic pulse (EMP), and to increase understanding of the geomagnetic field and the behavior of the charged particles in it. This gigantic experiment created new (inner) magnetic radiation belts encompassing almost the whole earth, and injected sufficient electrons and other energetic particles into the ionosphere to cause world wide effects. The electrons traveled back and forth along magnetic force lines, causing an artificial "aurora" when striking the atmosphere near the North Pole. This was reported only much later, on August 13-20th of 1961 in Keesings Historisch Archief (K.H.A.). The report said that the US Military planned to create a "telecommunications shield in the ionosphere at 3,000 km height, by bringing into orbit 350,000 million copper needles, each 2-4 cm long [total weight 16 kg], forming a belt 10 km thick and 40 km wide, the needles spaced about 100 m apart." This was designed to replace the ionosphere "because telecommunications are impaired by magnetic storms and solar flares." The US planned to add to the number of copper needles if the experiment proved to be successful. This plan was strongly opposed by the International Union of Astronomers."

Then:

On July 9th, 1962, the US began a further series of experiments with the ionosphere. From their description: "one kiloton device, at a height of 60 km and one megaton and one multi-megaton, at several hundred kilometers height". (K.H.A., 29 June 1962).

These tests seriously disturbed the lower Van Allen Belt, substantially altering its shape and intensity. "In this experiment the inner Van Allen Belt will be practically destroyed for a period of time; particles from the Belt will be transported to the atmosphere. It is anticipated that the earth's magnetic field will be disturbed over long distances for several hours, preventing radio communication. The explosion in the inner radiation belt will create an artificial dome of polar light that will be visible from Los Angeles". (K.H.A. 11 May 1962).

This was the experiment which called forth the strong protest of the Queen's Astronomer, Sir Martin Ryle in the UK. On the 19th of July... NASA announced that as a consequence of the high altitude nuclear test of July 9th, a new radiation belt had been formed, stretching from a height of about 400 km to 1600 km; it can be seen as a temporary extension of the lower Van Allen Belt" (K.H.A. 5 August 1962).

"... Starfish made a much wider belt [than Project Argus] that extends from low altitude out past L=3 [i.e. three earth radiuses or about 13,000 km above the surface of the earth]."Later in 1962, the USSR undertook similar planetary experiments, creating three new radiation belts between 7,000 and 13,000 km above the earth. According to the Encyclopedia, the electron fluxes in the lower Van Allen Belt have changed markedly since the 1962 high-altitude nuclear explosions by the US and USSR, never returning to their former state. According to American scientists, it could take many hundreds of years for the Van Allen Belts to destabilize at their normal levels."

Keep in mind now that, while they are out there blowing up our atmosphere, they want to blame Global Warming on the masses of regular people!

My backyard overlooks the Pyrenees, the crossroads for air traffic between Europe and Africa, South America and Spain, Northern Europe, England, Scandinavia, and Southern Europe and Africa. It's a very busy place. I sit at my desk beside a window that overlooks this sky and I look out this window many times per day and notice the sky in all humors. The following photographs I took from my backyard are of CONTRAILS made by high volume air traffic that, on some days, leaves lingering trails due to the conditions in the stratosphere. Those conditions can be correlated with conditions in the troposphere as well as the weather before, during and after the days when these trails form and linger so long. If I [were] a hysterical, brainwashed nutjob, I would think I was being poisoned. But I know what they are, I have observed them for hours and days on end and have a memory of similar phenomena on a much smaller scale - and much less frequent because the planetary conditions were different - when I was growing up. Believe me, they are CONTRAILS...

© Laura Knight-Jadczyk, Changes in the atmospheric conditions have led to skies more and more busy in recent times.

© Laura Knight-Jadczyk

© Laura Knight-Jadczyk CONTRAIL not "chemtrail"!

During the 1980's, rocket launches globally numbered about 500 to 600 a year, peaking at 1500 in 1989. There were many more during the Gulf War. The Shuttle is the largest of the solid fuel rockets, with twin 45 meter boosters. All solid fuel rockets release large amounts of hydrochloric acid in their exhaust, each Shuttle flight injecting about 75 tons of ozone destroying chlorine into the stratosphere. Those launched since 1992 inject even more ozone-destroying chlorine, about 187 tons, into the stratosphere (which contains the ozone layer).

I'm reading a paper about cometary impacts which has some information that bears on our topic and I think we can trust it since it is not being produced in a program to disinform relative to so-called chemtrails.

The first thing of interest is the main historically known large body which impacted the Earth: the Tunguska object. What is important to us in relation to chemtrails is that this object exploded in the atmosphere in June 1908 and for many nights afterward the sky was unusually luminous over Europe and western Asia, allowing people to read newspapers at night.

When scientists finally made it to the remote site in 1927, no visible fragments of the exploded body were found. Later field work uncovered peculiar black, shiny, metallic spheres in the soil of numerous small, shallow, oval craters - 50 to 200 meters diameter - similar to the craters of the Carolina Bays. These spheres were typical of extraterrestrial bodies having a composition very high in iridium, nickel, cobalt and other metals.

© Unknown, Trees flatten outwards in a central location of remote Siberia above which the cometary fragment exploded on the upper atmosphere in 1908

Now, here is where the connection comes in: An unusually high content of these same metals were later found in Antarctic ice cores, but in the layer relating to the year 1912.

That is to say, it took four years for the stuff deposited in the stratosphere to precipitate onto Earth.

From the Antarctic data, global fallout of 7 million tons was estimated for the Tunguska body which means that it's diameter would have been about 160 meters.

The dust from such objects exploded in the stratosphere diffuses over the globe and it usually takes a period of about three to six months for this to happen. The time that it takes for anything in the stratosphere to get to the ground is about 3 years (or more) and that is "independent of the initial amount of dust {or whatever}." Also, there are so many atmospheric variables that it cannot be determined where the stuff will go.

That is, materials injected into the stratosphere do NOT precipitate onto the ground under which it is "laid" (as in so-called chemtrails) except, perhaps, almost accidentally, and much, much later.

Again, this has no bearing on spraying that takes place at much lower altitudes, as in the troposphere, but clearly, what is going on in the stratosphere is NOT "chemtrails."

I think that I have presented more than sufficient food for thought on the topic of so-called "chemtrails" to suggest that, yes, there is something really wicked going on, but it ain't what you think. In fact, it's worse. YES, something is VERY wrong in our skies - but it is not chemtrails. The CONTRAILS themselves have changed and THAT is a huge warning about our atmosphere and our climate and the implications are a lot scarier than if some nutjobs in the Pentagon were just trying to poison us. Heck, we could survive that. Most of life on earth will NOT survive what these contrails portend!

[Nick Matkin]

Excellent article Amzer Zo. Thanks. I did consider posting a similar no-nonsense link on the subject. There are so many well thought out, clearly explaining all the myths and misconceptions, in easy words anyone can understand. Unfortunately all that happens is they get rebutted by some pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo site posted by someone who doesn't know it's mumbo-jumbo, but does re-enforce their beliefs.

The quote "If I were a hysterical, brainwashed nutjob, I would think I was being poisoned" sort of says it all...

Nick

[Sidney]

Nick, I understand your own right to an opinion, but the nutjob remark I WAY OUT OF LINE.

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by Sidney (here)
Nick, I understand your own right to an opinion, but the nutjob remark I WAY OUT OF LINE.

It was simply a quote from the above article, written by Laura Knight-Jadczyk and aimed in her opinion, at the chemtrail conspiracy theorists. I will state now that I did not intend to aim it at anyone specifically contributing to this thread. I am happy to apologize if you think it was indented, unnecessary, crude jibe.

Nevertheless, there are points in the article and my posting which need countering if the facts are demonstrably incorrect.

Nick

[Daphne]

Done with you nick. So here are 2 more photos of 2 suns in the sky. Notice the blue hues to the left of the small sun, and the orange hues to the right and our sun.

[Daphne]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

Posted by Sidney (here)
Nick, I understand your own right to an opinion, but the nutjob remark I WAY OUT OF LINE.

It was simply a quote from the above article, written by Laura Knight-Jadczyk and aimed in her opinion, at the chemtrail conspiracy theorists. I will state now that I did not intend to aim it at anyone specifically contributing to this thread. I am happy to apologize if you think it was indented, unnecessary, crude jibe.

Nevertheless, there are points in the article and my posting which need countering if the facts are demonstrably incorrect.

Nick

You are a real hostile individual and I feel quite attacked

[Daphne]

These all in a row show the clouds moving and obscuring the second sun.

Nick has still refused to take a photo and I find these anomalies every day.

[Daphne]

Just in case you tell the blue are storm clouds, here is a darkened exposure of one shot. Pretty bright blue. Where did it come from? Is this normal?

Please make sure to open the picture to see it large, so much better that way.