Thursday, May 28, 2009

What Happened To Kates Playgound

SCIE CHEMICAL NAME: The Neverending Story ...

"You can not see a thing unless you believe there is." - Terry Brooks



Or, at least if you do not take at least consider the possibility that may exist. I think the crux of the case is this: from what I have been able to see, the side of the skeptics with a vengeance that she magnificently represents has always done its utmost to try to remove any question exceeded the bounds of the "normalcy" and put into question the very foundations of what we call "shared reality". So it is that in the cauldron of "urban legends" from "sbufalare" (personally I find it bleak and evil genius at the same time the use of this neologism, part of a precise and refined protocol of psychological conditioning, assembled ad hoc from people who know il proprio mestiere…) trovino pari dignità Wanna Marchi e l’11 settembre, il mago Otelma e le scie chimiche, allo scopo di ingenerare la falsa impressione che il substrato di origine di tutte queste svariate questioni sia riconducibile a null’altro che all’imbroglio, alla frode o alla vera e propria paranoia di alcuni individui.
Vorrei aggiungere che trovo estremamente difficile, in questo preciso momento (28 maggio, ore 15.03), attenermi alle regole di un confronto pacato su questo argomento, tale è il disgusto che provo nel dover stare qui a discutere in maniera "politicamente corretta" sull'esistenza o meno delle cosiddette "scie chimiche" mentre nel cielo sopra la mia testa imperversa un'attività aerea unprecedented since this morning at 9 (when the sky was clear, blue, clear, and there was a plane to pay) is a show that started hallucinating not define justice. At any time watching the sky, I could observe and count a minimum of six aircraft until even 9:00 to 10:00, all with their beautiful persistent contrails that blend together. The sky is now a milky brew, and I should accept the idea of \u200b\u200bbeing a paranoid, noted that the traffic is completely normal and that those are very normal condensation trails ...


That said, we enter into the substance of his remarks.

[...] this is the core of the problem. Never mind the controversy and personal pitfalls real or alleged: that there is evidence of the existence of "chemtrails"? Those that have been submitted so far were not convincing and in fact are not accepted by the community of experts. Indeed, very often the verification work has shown that such errors or false.

Sorry, very busy, but who would have represented this community of professionals? On what basis they have expressed their evaluations? Taking a look at various arguments for the reality of the phenomenon of "Chemtrails", all supposedly analyzed, explained and dismissed from any foundation proprio nel suo sito, ho trovato affermazioni sorprendenti, quando non addirittura fuorvianti, di questi sedicenti “addetti ai lavori”, come questa:

2.08. Dai radiosondaggi si può capire se sussistono le condizioni per la formazione o la persistenza delle scie?
No. Quest'idea nasconde una serie di passaggi logici dati per scontati che vale la pena esaminare. I radiosondaggi sono misurazioni eseguite da pochissimi centri meteorologici in Italia, tramite il lancio di palloni equipaggiati con sonde. Tali sonde salgono fino a quote molto alte (anche 30.000 m) e forniscono al centro di controllo a terra i dati di temperatura, umidità e pressione lungo tutto il loro percorso. In order to examine the data of radiosondes and whether the formation of contrails is possible, they should be true at least three major assumptions:
1. The soundings should provide consistent results and error-free;

2. The values \u200b\u200bof the soundings should not vary significantly at a distance of many miles and much time from the point and time of measurement;
3. The training conditions should allow for comparison with absolute precision, to define whether the contrail will form or not.
None of these assumptions is true:
1. The soundings, like any instrument, commettono errori spesso abbastanza vistosi; siccome viene usata una sola sonda, non è possibile fare un trattamento statistico dei dati cercando di avvicinarsi al valore vero.

2. Come si è già detto, la variabilità delle condizioni atmosferiche è molto alta: una misura puntuale non può in alcun modo fornire con precisione la situazione in quota, né il variare di tale situazione col passare del tempo.

3. Le condizioni teoriche per predire la formazione derivano da modelli che sono semplificazioni delle reali condizioni e che sono tutt'altro che infallibili nelle loro previsioni, soprattutto se si cerca di usarli senza saperlo fare e senza conoscerne caratteristiche, limiti e fallibilità.

Extraordinary. This means that when, as a driver, I will compile a flight plan it based on these weather data for the various units, I will not give me too much pain to try to understand if, for example, or meet conditions less favorable to the formation of ice on the wings, or a strong head-wind that could make me consume more fuel than expected and even prevent me from reaching its destination, because "the variability of weather conditions is very high." In other words, the techniques of piloting and navigation are still taught in flight schools around the world are just an approximation, if not a waste of time, dato che comunque le condizioni climatiche in quota sarebbero una sorta di esercizio statistico, quando non un terno al lotto. Fortuna vuole (e i sedicenti esperti hanno convenientemente dimenticato di citare questo fatto) che la raccolta e l’interpretazione dei dati atmosferici relativi alle varie quote e rotte si basano anche sulle informazioni fornite dai piloti in volo, il che garantisce che i bollettini relativi alle condizioni presenti in quota siano regolarmente aggiornati e quindi ragionevolmente accurati.

Posso chiederle qual è la sua "best evidence" dell'esistenza del fenomeno?

Direi proprio quella che il passo citato sopra cerca convenientemente di smontare: il fatto che in innumerevoli circostanze a disproportionate number of aircraft they were to issue long persistent trails occupying an area of \u200b\u200bsky at that time, according to figures provided by agencies, it did weather conditions favorable for the formation of contrails. Even more so when some of these aircraft, occasionally, were at odds considerably lower than the minimum needed to trigger this phenomenon (a fact which I personally witnessed several times).
One of these cases is well documented in this short video, shot on the outskirts of Turin October 6, 2003, of which I possess full version, which certainly offers a better quality and definition:



It seems quite clear (although it based on the statements of the operator who carried out the shooting), which framed the aircraft is flying at an altitude considerably lower than the canonical 8,000 + yards ... It can be seen it issues the trails rather persistent throughout the trailing edge of both wings. Of course, even in this case will see what everyone wants to see, as one who brings up strings of Berenice and other aerodynamic effects of condensation which could theoretically explain the observed phenomenon (but certainly not the length of the trails emitted from the plane in question), But the weather conditions of that day do not justify it.

network exists in a mass of documents, patents, analysis, discussion, such that anyone with common sense and a healthy minimum of will and intelligence will be able to evaluate and discern how things really are.

Here, I would ask you to show me these documents, you already know and therefore should not involve too much effort.

Excuse me, but at this point I feel cheated: she knows very well these documents, reported in all the main sites that deal with the phenomenon of chemtrails.

Patent potentially linked to the phenomenon of chemtrails (I selected the most interesting):
U.S. Patent 4,948,050 (Picot)
U.S. Patent 4,412,654 (Yates et al.)
U.S. Patent 3,813,875 (Paine et al.)
U.S. patent 6,315,213 (Cordani)
U.S. Patent 5,003,186 (Chang et al .)
U.S. Patent 3,899,144 (Werle et al.)

The HAARP patent system (a key factor for the project below)
U.S. Patent 4,686,605 (Eastlund)

Owning the Weather by 2025

The Space Preservation Act 2001, where it appears just the term "chemtrails"

These two documents are very Lighting:

Climate Change Global Warming



For more documents, I suggest the following web pages: 1 , 2

However, even the RAI has confirmed the existence of these " chemtrails, "though he did talking about the Russian (Communist trails!)

For myself, I see what I see, and this is backed by highly qualified people, as an aeronautical engineer, a former -fighter pilot, or a biologist of his knowledge, but from what I read on his blog, I do not think she or her associates have shown though minimum respect for him and to the arguments presented by him

Can I ask what are the technical arguments aeronautical engineer and former pilot?

The aeronautical engineer I know him well, this is the engineer. Fenu Louis, who wrote this interesting article challenge to a controversial report published by the magazine Focus and interesting PowerPoint presentation on contrails.

Former AMI pilot is an officer with over thirty years of service, which was finally convinced of the anomalous nature of these wakes when he observed a long, dense and persistent flow to the side of Mount Terminillo (I think it was the Terminillo) and if you check, this peak reaches 2217 meters (even if it was the Gran Sasso, 2912 m, still much to below 3000 meters). I believe that a professional with thousands of flying hours under his belt knows how to interpret correctly the phenomenon in the light of its experience.

For the biologist, I presume you are referring to Dr. Pattera. It is not over: it is made. Dr. Pattera makes false allegations, he rejects the evidence of the facts documented in the literature and ridicule those who point out his mistakes by bringing facts to support. This is conduct that leads to respect. I refer to the issue of so-called "spiders Migration, which explain some phenomena apparently related to so-called" chemtrails "Pattera existence denied. But their existence is documented from the time of Darwin and just a puff of the Journal of Arachnology to find the literature that confirms the dispersion beyond 5000 m above sea level ...


Let us admit the ' existence of these spiders Migration: what evidence you can provide to support this working hypothesis? The analysis seems to me Dr. Pattera revealed a component in artificial samples examined by him. In this case, I think you're failing. And then, Pattera is not the only one who has submitted documentation in this regard: 1 , 2.


... nor do I have reason to believe that this attitude would be different to others. As I said, "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert."

On this I beg to differ. There is no paper of literature that confirms the thesis of dr. Pattera or "chemtrails" in general. The vast majority of the experts confirmed that the "chemtrails" are simple contrail misinterpreted by non-experts. is not "equal and opposite: it is not a small minority of experts against a huge number of experts. For example, I know that none of the 52,500 pilots of the Air Line Pilots Association, the U.S. has ever expressed support for the theory of the existence of "chemtrails." No forecaster has expressed pro-trails, but many have done to make clear that the phenomenon is a mistake. She, in her experience as a pilot, has seen through his eyes a persistent trail quotas (2000 m or less) by the alleged supporters of the "chemtrails"?

not at 2000 m or less, but certainly between 2500 and 3000. The first and most striking was the May 1999, around Rovigo. Two aircraft on parallel courses, separated by about 5 nautical miles from east to west. A show that will never forget.

So, what should I do? Losing valuable hours to collect and categorize all the material in my possession, in order to refute point by point to the many issues related materials such as meteorology, climate, aerodynamics, chemistry, biology, geology, nanotechnology, the 'e, geopolitics, economics, etc.., all critical to an understanding of the complex phenomenon of chemtrails in its entirety?

No. It would be enough to start from a single point, very simple: "chemtrails" exist? What evidence is there? If the tests hold, then we talk about everything else. But it is here, in my opinion, we must leave.

Well, I think I made a pretty solid argument. I am also convinced that chemtrails are part of an integrated system for the control and manipulation of the climate, which apparently is the central element of the HAARP project. In this I am in total harmony with General Fabio Mini. The European parliament he is worried.

I also believe that one of the critical areas of this program is off the Atlantic coasts of France and Spain, at del Golfo di Biscaglia, dove una costante e intensa attività documenta i tentativi (spesso riusciti) di “bloccare” o “deviare” i fronti freddi e umidi in arrivo sul continente europeo. Ho ascoltato più di una testimonianza diretta da passeggeri in volo sull'Atlantico che parlavano di istruzioni a chiudere tutte le tendine parasole, di giorno e di notte, da parte del personale di volo, proprio in corrispondenza di quest'area. Naturalmente chi ha sbirciato da dietro le tendine ha visto coi propri occhi qualcosa che rasentava l'incredibile...
Sulle eventuali ragioni di tale programma, posso senz’altro rimandare al famoso documento “Possedere il Clima entro il 2025” redatto dall’USAF, che ho citato sopra e che lei senz’altro conosce bene.

Personalmente ritengo manchi ancora un elemento di prova fondamentale per dirimere una volta per tutte la questione delle scie chimiche, e mi sto adoperando per ottenerlo. Quando ne potrò disporre, sarò lieto di aprire una discussione con lei a tal proposito, così da focalizzarci su una questione specifica ma potenzialmente risolutiva. Spero proprio di riuscire a concretizzare tutto entro l’anno in corso.

Interessante. Le posso chiedere qual è quest'elemento?

Quello che avrebbero dovuto raccogliere gli enti preposti con mezzi appositi, se davvero avessero voluto dirimere la questione una volta per tutte, e che despite the urgings of thousands of citizens did not. A sampling of the atmosphere at high altitude, combined with the occurrence of the phenomenon in question.

Given the record, I do not expect in any case his second thoughts on the matter. From its easy sarcasm, I understand his skepticism that spans virtually every area of \u200b\u200bhuman knowledge. Blessed is she who is comforted by the assurance of "science": the only certainty I have is that of having none.

contrary, Mr. Bosco. In the face of incontrovertible evidence, I'd be willing to change his mind, as is the technical community. I do not reject the facts: I only ask that they are well established. Do not confuse skepticism with caution and prudence with certainty. The mass of evidence so far indicates that it is reasonable to say that the "chemtrails" do not exist. But the scientific method requires that, before conclusive demonstration of a phenomenon, this phenomenon is accepted as scientific. This has not happened yet, but if it happened, I'd be the first to rethink my position.

Here we are in a Catch-22 paradox: "There are no scientific studies proving the existence of chemtrails, and then carry out a study aimed to prove its existence is not necessary." It seems to me that all the scientific literature which is referred to always starts from the assumption that in the case of contrails, but I've never seen any evidence that proves categorically that this is only and exclusively to this natural phenomenon, as certain physical mechanisms are common to both modes (eg, the condensation nuclei). This is because it has never started a research program (if we exclude the much reviled independent researchers ...) in order to investigate the presence or absence of metallic debris at high altitude, as claimed by proponents of the thesis "chemistry." And I do not you come to mention the ridiculous test on jet fuel by Discovery Channel: where is it written that any chemicals would be sprayed through discharges from the turbine?

supporters are, if anything, the existence of "chemtrails" unshakable certainty that show and come to say that the photo of contrail pre-1990 are false and that even Life commits them to mask the conspiracy. Do you agree with these positions?

I think I already answered the question of the picture Life, and also the question of unshakable certainty. I do not deny there are any disputes about the excesses of chemtrails, but I seem to be shared equally by both parties. For example, what do you think this picture of his companion "Peyote" that I found online?



I ask, in conclusion, the consent to the publication of its kind reply. Although she has so far said no to a debate, I think it is right that our readers know that dialogue is possible and that there is willingness on his part and interest in doing experiments to settle the issue, and these attitudes are laudable and constructive.

I hope that his words are sincere, given the absolute seriousness of the matter. From what I have seen and read so far, I would be skeptical, but always ready to reconsider my position. Of course I do not expect that my plastic surgery can cause it to revise its. It is our approach is diametrically opposite: his is characterized by a reductionist scientism that seeks to break down in all factors explained rationally, my type is more holistic, inclusive. It will be a professional deformation due to the fact that for years directing a magazine called NEXUS , which in Latin means "link". In other words, an information model that aims to find and show the connections between seemingly unconnected elements.
In conclusion, I am more than convinced that soon the tide will unequivocally justice to many issues currently under dispute. In fact it is already happening, but we do not yet have a clear perception because of an outdated cultural model and a media system too supine to certain vested interests who would like everyone to continue to remain as is. But it is increasingly approaching the time when each of us must choose a side.
I've already made my choice a long time, and apparently this applies to you. I hope that, independently of each other's position, we can at least maintain a respectful attitude towards those of others. Anyway, I appreciated the tone within which civil, at least for the moment, we were able to confine this discussion. If it is necessary, the resume, although I'd rather be in the presence of radical elements new, whether for or against a hypothesis or the other. If we are still here to talk about the reality of the phenomenon or the buffalo, there is a reason as well ... and personally I have quite clear ideas about it.

Below, some photos with commentary.


A classic "grid" of trails at sunset. Condensation trails, or something else?


Two examples of photography, before which I find really grotesque to hear about normal "contrails" ...


dificult to think that aerovia il traffico civile segua rotte di questo tipo...



...mentre in questo caso e in quello successivo, a giudicare dai raggi di virata così stretti...


...si tratta senz'altro di velivoli militari relativamente piccoli: caccia o caccia-bombardieri.


Un MD-80 in versione "sprayer": si noti la corposa scia emessa lungo l'intero bordo di uscita delle semiali...


Scie di condensazione? Ci vuole una bella dose di fantasia e di coraggio per pensare che del semplice vapore water can produce such effects ...


I heard bring up the effects of condensation "streamlined" for photos like this. I do not deny that could happen, but so long and persistent?


Oooops ... a plane leaves the trail and the other does not. Two portions of the atmosphere "in separate house?


Another example of different atmospheres in a confined space. According to a Swissair captain who commented this picture, it is possible but highly unlikely in this way, if not impossible. It is more likely the depletion a tank and a shift to another, or something ...


Normal contrails? Really?

Examples of abnormal refraction due to particulate matter released from the usual "chemtrails" ...


A "Mammatus" rare cloud formation theory, but for some reason, more and more frequent in many places the old and the new continent ...


electromagnetic Climate Change? Meteorologists what they to say about it?

What Happened To Kates Playgound

SCIE CHEMICAL NAME: The Neverending Story ...

"You can not see a thing unless you believe there is." - Terry Brooks



Or, at least if you do not take at least consider the possibility that may exist. I think the crux of the case is this: from what I have been able to see, the side of the skeptics with a vengeance that she magnificently represents has always done its utmost to try to remove any question exceeded the bounds of the "normalcy" and put into question the very foundations of what we call "shared reality". So it is that in the cauldron of "urban legends" from "sbufalare" (personally I find it bleak and evil genius at the same time the use of this neologism, part of a precise and refined protocol of psychological conditioning, assembled ad hoc from people who know il proprio mestiere…) trovino pari dignità Wanna Marchi e l’11 settembre, il mago Otelma e le scie chimiche, allo scopo di ingenerare la falsa impressione che il substrato di origine di tutte queste svariate questioni sia riconducibile a null’altro che all’imbroglio, alla frode o alla vera e propria paranoia di alcuni individui.
Vorrei aggiungere che trovo estremamente difficile, in questo preciso momento (28 maggio, ore 15.03), attenermi alle regole di un confronto pacato su questo argomento, tale è il disgusto che provo nel dover stare qui a discutere in maniera "politicamente corretta" sull'esistenza o meno delle cosiddette "scie chimiche" mentre nel cielo sopra la mia testa imperversa un'attività aerea unprecedented since this morning at 9 (when the sky was clear, blue, clear, and there was a plane to pay) is a show that started hallucinating not define justice. At any time watching the sky, I could observe and count a minimum of six aircraft until even 9:00 to 10:00, all with their beautiful persistent contrails that blend together. The sky is now a milky brew, and I should accept the idea of \u200b\u200bbeing a paranoid, noted that the traffic is completely normal and that those are very normal condensation trails ...


That said, we enter into the substance of his remarks.

[...] this is the core of the problem. Never mind the controversy and personal pitfalls real or alleged: that there is evidence of the existence of "chemtrails"? Those that have been submitted so far were not convincing and in fact are not accepted by the community of experts. Indeed, very often the verification work has shown that such errors or false.

Sorry, very busy, but who would have represented this community of professionals? On what basis they have expressed their evaluations? Taking a look at various arguments for the reality of the phenomenon of "Chemtrails", all supposedly analyzed, explained and dismissed from any foundation proprio nel suo sito, ho trovato affermazioni sorprendenti, quando non addirittura fuorvianti, di questi sedicenti “addetti ai lavori”, come questa:

2.08. Dai radiosondaggi si può capire se sussistono le condizioni per la formazione o la persistenza delle scie?
No. Quest'idea nasconde una serie di passaggi logici dati per scontati che vale la pena esaminare. I radiosondaggi sono misurazioni eseguite da pochissimi centri meteorologici in Italia, tramite il lancio di palloni equipaggiati con sonde. Tali sonde salgono fino a quote molto alte (anche 30.000 m) e forniscono al centro di controllo a terra i dati di temperatura, umidità e pressione lungo tutto il loro percorso. In order to examine the data of radiosondes and whether the formation of contrails is possible, they should be true at least three major assumptions:
1. The soundings should provide consistent results and error-free;

2. The values \u200b\u200bof the soundings should not vary significantly at a distance of many miles and much time from the point and time of measurement;
3. The training conditions should allow for comparison with absolute precision, to define whether the contrail will form or not.
None of these assumptions is true:
1. The soundings, like any instrument, commettono errori spesso abbastanza vistosi; siccome viene usata una sola sonda, non è possibile fare un trattamento statistico dei dati cercando di avvicinarsi al valore vero.

2. Come si è già detto, la variabilità delle condizioni atmosferiche è molto alta: una misura puntuale non può in alcun modo fornire con precisione la situazione in quota, né il variare di tale situazione col passare del tempo.

3. Le condizioni teoriche per predire la formazione derivano da modelli che sono semplificazioni delle reali condizioni e che sono tutt'altro che infallibili nelle loro previsioni, soprattutto se si cerca di usarli senza saperlo fare e senza conoscerne caratteristiche, limiti e fallibilità.

Extraordinary. This means that when, as a driver, I will compile a flight plan it based on these weather data for the various units, I will not give me too much pain to try to understand if, for example, or meet conditions less favorable to the formation of ice on the wings, or a strong head-wind that could make me consume more fuel than expected and even prevent me from reaching its destination, because "the variability of weather conditions is very high." In other words, the techniques of piloting and navigation are still taught in flight schools around the world are just an approximation, if not a waste of time, dato che comunque le condizioni climatiche in quota sarebbero una sorta di esercizio statistico, quando non un terno al lotto. Fortuna vuole (e i sedicenti esperti hanno convenientemente dimenticato di citare questo fatto) che la raccolta e l’interpretazione dei dati atmosferici relativi alle varie quote e rotte si basano anche sulle informazioni fornite dai piloti in volo, il che garantisce che i bollettini relativi alle condizioni presenti in quota siano regolarmente aggiornati e quindi ragionevolmente accurati.

Posso chiederle qual è la sua "best evidence" dell'esistenza del fenomeno?

Direi proprio quella che il passo citato sopra cerca convenientemente di smontare: il fatto che in innumerevoli circostanze a disproportionate number of aircraft they were to issue long persistent trails occupying an area of \u200b\u200bsky at that time, according to figures provided by agencies, it did weather conditions favorable for the formation of contrails. Even more so when some of these aircraft, occasionally, were at odds considerably lower than the minimum needed to trigger this phenomenon (a fact which I personally witnessed several times).
One of these cases is well documented in this short video, shot on the outskirts of Turin October 6, 2003, of which I possess full version, which certainly offers a better quality and definition:



It seems quite clear (although it based on the statements of the operator who carried out the shooting), which framed the aircraft is flying at an altitude considerably lower than the canonical 8,000 + yards ... It can be seen it issues the trails rather persistent throughout the trailing edge of both wings. Of course, even in this case will see what everyone wants to see, as one who brings up strings of Berenice and other aerodynamic effects of condensation which could theoretically explain the observed phenomenon (but certainly not the length of the trails emitted from the plane in question), But the weather conditions of that day do not justify it.

network exists in a mass of documents, patents, analysis, discussion, such that anyone with common sense and a healthy minimum of will and intelligence will be able to evaluate and discern how things really are.

Here, I would ask you to show me these documents, you already know and therefore should not involve too much effort.

Excuse me, but at this point I feel cheated: she knows very well these documents, reported in all the main sites that deal with the phenomenon of chemtrails.

Patent potentially linked to the phenomenon of chemtrails (I selected the most interesting):
U.S. Patent 4,948,050 (Picot)
U.S. Patent 4,412,654 (Yates et al.)
U.S. Patent 3,813,875 (Paine et al.)
U.S. patent 6,315,213 (Cordani)
U.S. Patent 5,003,186 (Chang et al .)
U.S. Patent 3,899,144 (Werle et al.)

The HAARP patent system (a key factor for the project below)
U.S. Patent 4,686,605 (Eastlund)

Owning the Weather by 2025

The Space Preservation Act 2001, where it appears just the term "chemtrails"

These two documents are very Lighting:

Climate Change Global Warming



For more documents, I suggest the following web pages: 1 , 2

However, even the RAI has confirmed the existence of these " chemtrails, "though he did talking about the Russian (Communist trails!)

For myself, I see what I see, and this is backed by highly qualified people, as an aeronautical engineer, a former -fighter pilot, or a biologist of his knowledge, but from what I read on his blog, I do not think she or her associates have shown though minimum respect for him and to the arguments presented by him

Can I ask what are the technical arguments aeronautical engineer and former pilot?

The aeronautical engineer I know him well, this is the engineer. Fenu Louis, who wrote this interesting article challenge to a controversial report published by the magazine Focus and interesting PowerPoint presentation on contrails.

Former AMI pilot is an officer with over thirty years of service, which was finally convinced of the anomalous nature of these wakes when he observed a long, dense and persistent flow to the side of Mount Terminillo (I think it was the Terminillo) and if you check, this peak reaches 2217 meters (even if it was the Gran Sasso, 2912 m, still much to below 3000 meters). I believe that a professional with thousands of flying hours under his belt knows how to interpret correctly the phenomenon in the light of its experience.

For the biologist, I presume you are referring to Dr. Pattera. It is not over: it is made. Dr. Pattera makes false allegations, he rejects the evidence of the facts documented in the literature and ridicule those who point out his mistakes by bringing facts to support. This is conduct that leads to respect. I refer to the issue of so-called "spiders Migration, which explain some phenomena apparently related to so-called" chemtrails "Pattera existence denied. But their existence is documented from the time of Darwin and just a puff of the Journal of Arachnology to find the literature that confirms the dispersion beyond 5000 m above sea level ...


Let us admit the ' existence of these spiders Migration: what evidence you can provide to support this working hypothesis? The analysis seems to me Dr. Pattera revealed a component in artificial samples examined by him. In this case, I think you're failing. And then, Pattera is not the only one who has submitted documentation in this regard: 1 , 2.


... nor do I have reason to believe that this attitude would be different to others. As I said, "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert."

On this I beg to differ. There is no paper of literature that confirms the thesis of dr. Pattera or "chemtrails" in general. The vast majority of the experts confirmed that the "chemtrails" are simple contrail misinterpreted by non-experts. is not "equal and opposite: it is not a small minority of experts against a huge number of experts. For example, I know that none of the 52,500 pilots of the Air Line Pilots Association, the U.S. has ever expressed support for the theory of the existence of "chemtrails." No forecaster has expressed pro-trails, but many have done to make clear that the phenomenon is a mistake. She, in her experience as a pilot, has seen through his eyes a persistent trail quotas (2000 m or less) by the alleged supporters of the "chemtrails"?

not at 2000 m or less, but certainly between 2500 and 3000. The first and most striking was the May 1999, around Rovigo. Two aircraft on parallel courses, separated by about 5 nautical miles from east to west. A show that will never forget.

So, what should I do? Losing valuable hours to collect and categorize all the material in my possession, in order to refute point by point to the many issues related materials such as meteorology, climate, aerodynamics, chemistry, biology, geology, nanotechnology, the 'e, geopolitics, economics, etc.., all critical to an understanding of the complex phenomenon of chemtrails in its entirety?

No. It would be enough to start from a single point, very simple: "chemtrails" exist? What evidence is there? If the tests hold, then we talk about everything else. But it is here, in my opinion, we must leave.

Well, I think I made a pretty solid argument. I am also convinced that chemtrails are part of an integrated system for the control and manipulation of the climate, which apparently is the central element of the HAARP project. In this I am in total harmony with General Fabio Mini. The European parliament he is worried.

I also believe that one of the critical areas of this program is off the Atlantic coasts of France and Spain, at del Golfo di Biscaglia, dove una costante e intensa attività documenta i tentativi (spesso riusciti) di “bloccare” o “deviare” i fronti freddi e umidi in arrivo sul continente europeo. Ho ascoltato più di una testimonianza diretta da passeggeri in volo sull'Atlantico che parlavano di istruzioni a chiudere tutte le tendine parasole, di giorno e di notte, da parte del personale di volo, proprio in corrispondenza di quest'area. Naturalmente chi ha sbirciato da dietro le tendine ha visto coi propri occhi qualcosa che rasentava l'incredibile...
Sulle eventuali ragioni di tale programma, posso senz’altro rimandare al famoso documento “Possedere il Clima entro il 2025” redatto dall’USAF, che ho citato sopra e che lei senz’altro conosce bene.

Personalmente ritengo manchi ancora un elemento di prova fondamentale per dirimere una volta per tutte la questione delle scie chimiche, e mi sto adoperando per ottenerlo. Quando ne potrò disporre, sarò lieto di aprire una discussione con lei a tal proposito, così da focalizzarci su una questione specifica ma potenzialmente risolutiva. Spero proprio di riuscire a concretizzare tutto entro l’anno in corso.

Interessante. Le posso chiedere qual è quest'elemento?

Quello che avrebbero dovuto raccogliere gli enti preposti con mezzi appositi, se davvero avessero voluto dirimere la questione una volta per tutte, e che despite the urgings of thousands of citizens did not. A sampling of the atmosphere at high altitude, combined with the occurrence of the phenomenon in question.

Given the record, I do not expect in any case his second thoughts on the matter. From its easy sarcasm, I understand his skepticism that spans virtually every area of \u200b\u200bhuman knowledge. Blessed is she who is comforted by the assurance of "science": the only certainty I have is that of having none.

contrary, Mr. Bosco. In the face of incontrovertible evidence, I'd be willing to change his mind, as is the technical community. I do not reject the facts: I only ask that they are well established. Do not confuse skepticism with caution and prudence with certainty. The mass of evidence so far indicates that it is reasonable to say that the "chemtrails" do not exist. But the scientific method requires that, before conclusive demonstration of a phenomenon, this phenomenon is accepted as scientific. This has not happened yet, but if it happened, I'd be the first to rethink my position.

Here we are in a Catch-22 paradox: "There are no scientific studies proving the existence of chemtrails, and then carry out a study aimed to prove its existence is not necessary." It seems to me that all the scientific literature which is referred to always starts from the assumption that in the case of contrails, but I've never seen any evidence that proves categorically that this is only and exclusively to this natural phenomenon, as certain physical mechanisms are common to both modes (eg, the condensation nuclei). This is because it has never started a research program (if we exclude the much reviled independent researchers ...) in order to investigate the presence or absence of metallic debris at high altitude, as claimed by proponents of the thesis "chemistry." And I do not you come to mention the ridiculous test on jet fuel by Discovery Channel: where is it written that any chemicals would be sprayed through discharges from the turbine?

supporters are, if anything, the existence of "chemtrails" unshakable certainty that show and come to say that the photo of contrail pre-1990 are false and that even Life commits them to mask the conspiracy. Do you agree with these positions?

I think I already answered the question of the picture Life, and also the question of unshakable certainty. I do not deny there are any disputes about the excesses of chemtrails, but I seem to be shared equally by both parties. For example, what do you think this picture of his companion "Peyote" that I found online?



I ask, in conclusion, the consent to the publication of its kind reply. Although she has so far said no to a debate, I think it is right that our readers know that dialogue is possible and that there is willingness on his part and interest in doing experiments to settle the issue, and these attitudes are laudable and constructive.

I hope that his words are sincere, given the absolute seriousness of the matter. From what I have seen and read so far, I would be skeptical, but always ready to reconsider my position. Of course I do not expect that my plastic surgery can cause it to revise its. It is our approach is diametrically opposite: his is characterized by a reductionist scientism that seeks to break down in all factors explained rationally, my type is more holistic, inclusive. It will be a professional deformation due to the fact that for years directing a magazine called NEXUS , which in Latin means "link". In other words, an information model that aims to find and show the connections between seemingly unconnected elements.
In conclusion, I am more than convinced that soon the tide will unequivocally justice to many issues currently under dispute. In fact it is already happening, but we do not yet have a clear perception because of an outdated cultural model and a media system too supine to certain vested interests who would like everyone to continue to remain as is. But it is increasingly approaching the time when each of us must choose a side.
I've already made my choice a long time, and apparently this applies to you. I hope that, independently of each other's position, we can at least maintain a respectful attitude towards those of others. Anyway, I appreciated the tone within which civil, at least for the moment, we were able to confine this discussion. If it is necessary, the resume, although I'd rather be in the presence of radical elements new, whether for or against a hypothesis or the other. If we are still here to talk about the reality of the phenomenon or the buffalo, there is a reason as well ... and personally I have quite clear ideas about it.

Below, some photos with commentary.


A classic "grid" of trails at sunset. Condensation trails, or something else?


Two examples of photography, before which I find really grotesque to hear about normal "contrails" ...


dificult to think that aerovia il traffico civile segua rotte di questo tipo...



...mentre in questo caso e in quello successivo, a giudicare dai raggi di virata così stretti...


...si tratta senz'altro di velivoli militari relativamente piccoli: caccia o caccia-bombardieri.


Un MD-80 in versione "sprayer": si noti la corposa scia emessa lungo l'intero bordo di uscita delle semiali...


Scie di condensazione? Ci vuole una bella dose di fantasia e di coraggio per pensare che del semplice vapore water can produce such effects ...


I heard bring up the effects of condensation "streamlined" for photos like this. I do not deny that could happen, but so long and persistent?


Oooops ... a plane leaves the trail and the other does not. Two portions of the atmosphere "in separate house?


Another example of different atmospheres in a confined space. According to a Swissair captain who commented this picture, it is possible but highly unlikely in this way, if not impossible. It is more likely the depletion a tank and a shift to another, or something ...


Normal contrails? Really?

Examples of abnormal refraction due to particulate matter released from the usual "chemtrails" ...


A "Mammatus" rare cloud formation theory, but for some reason, more and more frequent in many places the old and the new continent ...


electromagnetic Climate Change? Meteorologists what they to say about it?

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Computer Won't Recognize Flip

active, NAME AND FACT

did not have to be equipped with amazing psychic powers to predict that the "buffalo hunters" par excellence, Paul Attivissimo, would not escape the fact the wonderful opportunity of my presence in Lugano to try to place on record a new , glorious chapter in its crusade against those who, ironically, low alloy, defines "sciachimisti" (the category from which my name out, considered simply a journalist trying to the best of its ability, skills and expertise, to obtain documents and testimony and transmit this information to the public, which will assess the consistency and its implications and will decide in conscience and freedom to accept or not). I read on his blog
the "news" of the day at the 4th International Congress sull'Ufologia Area and 40 years after landing on the moon , organized by CUSI in the person of Candida Mammoliti (thanks to its unique hospitality, great competence and a feeling decidedly out of the ordinary) stuffed in the best style Attivissimo of forcing, inaccuracies, omissions and easy ironies (as if I were amused to see me cut a quarter of an hour of time available , thus preventing me to properly investigate certain points of the my presentation, or a computer problem that prevented the operation of video or animation and laser pointer was unloading ...) but in the end, the fact remains that at the evening session devoted to debate the question and I was present, ready and willing comparison. Active, ground subsidence unlikely to boredom due to a lengthy investigation of the case by Dr. George Zanfretta Pattera, gone, avoiding conveniently (for him) what could be an interesting and enlightening debate on the issue chemtrails and possibly also the case that both Zanfretta amuses him.
I understand that even had it in mind to organize a link direct via phone with the meteorologist Giuliacci, who from his official position would have lit up the auditorium of the inconsistency issue of chemtrails, which are nothing more than normal contrails. What rotten luck! Giuliacci's intervention was not possible, which is a shame, because I wanted to at least ask him a question, just one:

"Notwithstanding that contrails are formed under certain atmospheric conditions, conditions that are known and are usually present starting from an altitude of 8,000 meters up, and explains the numerous documented cases of dense and persistent contrails made by aircraft operating at altitudes ranging between 5,000 and 3,000 meters and sometimes even lower? "

Giuliacci Together with the Decalogue, I noticed in passing on his blog a post on a dispute with Rosario Marciano (his bete noire, one might say) on some spectacular photos taken from the well known magazine American Life illustrating the heavens literally covered with condensation trails emitted by Allied fighters and bombers on the European front during the final stages of World War II. Indeed, a look very reminiscent of the many photos taken in recent years that shows our skies criss-crossed by dozens of chemtrails, and it is on this apparent equivalence Attivissimo subtly played, oblivious to dig la fossa da solo.




Il punto è questo: le foto mostrano esattamente quello che dicono, cioè scie di condensazione rilasciate da velivoli operanti ad alta quota (all’epoca i caccia e i bombardieri alleati operavano generalmente tra gli 8.000 e i 10.000 metri, per tenersi lontano dalla portata dell’artiglieria contraerea tedesca) in condizioni climatiche adeguate (nelle foto si nota neve sul terreno e sui tetti, quindi devono essere state scattate in inverno o all’inizio della primavera, quando le temperature, soprattutto in quota, sono assai basse). Sono numerosissime, dato che nel corso delle missioni di bombardamento sulla Germania, fra 1944 and 1945, were simultaneously in the sky many hundreds of aircraft (and in many cases, were thousands). They are very persistent, and this because of the powerful piston engines that drove these aircraft, engines driven at maximum performance in the flight of war, designed to provide sufficient power to the majority share as possible (see also the case with the aid of chemical additives, while if short term) but not to be "clean" means the amount of unburned oil and other particulates from the exhaust was impressive by our standards today (go and watch some films of which shows the power of the giant radial engines of a B-17 or B-29 before a mission and see what comes out ...), so these large particulate emissions at high altitude just favored the condensation of moisture in the atmosphere, a phenomenon which, as noted, occurs precisely in the so-called "condensation nuclei "and the subsequent formation of ice crystals. In other words, ideal conditions to the formation of numerous especially persistent contrails. Also add that the quality of fuels used in wartime was not even remotely comparable with that of today: it was so low that you designed and applied various devices to remedy catalysts, which were inspired some good models on the market today for installation on standard vehicles.
So, how can you equate the scenario just outlined, particularly given the simultaneous presence in the skies of several hundred (if not thousands) of aircraft, as today, arguing that these are only the contrails produced by normal commercial traffic? Perhaps a combined presentation of sound reasoning that is more than a few incontrovertible facts mental masturbation, lust and evocation of unlikely protagonists of "experts", coupled with the continued use of scorn and ridicule in order to disguise the paucity of their arguments (as exemplified by the story unlikely migration of spiders as responsible for the relapse of filaments, in every way worthy of that made at that time to explain crop circles, produced by the frantic chase in the fields of pairs of sea urchins in love ...).
One thing is certain: I will not be drawn into a sterile controversy, as happened to the great Massimo Mazzucco who sacrificed sleep to refute point by point to Attivissimo on various issues relating to 11 September 2001, without a draw from the spider hole (as far as the death knell for Attivissimo be played in the recent and scientifically documented discovery of highly sophisticated Termite between the collected dust at Ground Zero ...) I do not know how to earn a living, and Mr. Attivissimo how I can reconcile his work with the great deal of time and energy it takes in an attempt to disassemble, refute, ridicule and demonize issues of importance such as chemtrails, manipulation of the climate and September 11 (and even UFOs, for that matter), on which anyone with good will, without bias, independence of thought and sound discernment can find a monumental amount of documentation and separate fact from fanciful conjecture, the truth from the disinformation, information from buffalo . I prefer to spend very little free time I can carve out a more challenging work in more positive activities and rewarding from a social perspective.
The fact remains that the healthy and honest public debate there has been, and it was not me (nor Dr. Pattera, for that matter) to miss the appointment. Could it be that among all those that are looking at the bottom of the largest buffalo is really him?

Computer Won't Recognize Flip

active, NAME AND FACT

did not have to be equipped with amazing psychic powers to predict that the "buffalo hunters" par excellence, Paul Attivissimo, would not escape the fact the wonderful opportunity of my presence in Lugano to try to place on record a new , glorious chapter in its crusade against those who, ironically, low alloy, defines "sciachimisti" (the category from which my name out, considered simply a journalist trying to the best of its ability, skills and expertise, to obtain documents and testimony and transmit this information to the public, which will assess the consistency and its implications and will decide in conscience and freedom to accept or not). I read on his blog
the "news" of the day at the 4th International Congress sull'Ufologia Area and 40 years after landing on the moon , organized by CUSI in the person of Candida Mammoliti (thanks to its unique hospitality, great competence and a feeling decidedly out of the ordinary) stuffed in the best style Attivissimo of forcing, inaccuracies, omissions and easy ironies (as if I were amused to see me cut a quarter of an hour of time available , thus preventing me to properly investigate certain points of the my presentation, or a computer problem that prevented the operation of video or animation and laser pointer was unloading ...) but in the end, the fact remains that at the evening session devoted to debate the question and I was present, ready and willing comparison. Active, ground subsidence unlikely to boredom due to a lengthy investigation of the case by Dr. George Zanfretta Pattera, gone, avoiding conveniently (for him) what could be an interesting and enlightening debate on the issue chemtrails and possibly also the case that both Zanfretta amuses him.
I understand that even had it in mind to organize a link direct via phone with the meteorologist Giuliacci, who from his official position would have lit up the auditorium of the inconsistency issue of chemtrails, which are nothing more than normal contrails. What rotten luck! Giuliacci's intervention was not possible, which is a shame, because I wanted to at least ask him a question, just one:

"Notwithstanding that contrails are formed under certain atmospheric conditions, conditions that are known and are usually present starting from an altitude of 8,000 meters up, and explains the numerous documented cases of dense and persistent contrails made by aircraft operating at altitudes ranging between 5,000 and 3,000 meters and sometimes even lower? "

Giuliacci Together with the Decalogue, I noticed in passing on his blog a post on a dispute with Rosario Marciano (his bete noire, one might say) on some spectacular photos taken from the well known magazine American Life illustrating the heavens literally covered with condensation trails emitted by Allied fighters and bombers on the European front during the final stages of World War II. Indeed, a look very reminiscent of the many photos taken in recent years that shows our skies criss-crossed by dozens of chemtrails, and it is on this apparent equivalence Attivissimo subtly played, oblivious to dig la fossa da solo.




Il punto è questo: le foto mostrano esattamente quello che dicono, cioè scie di condensazione rilasciate da velivoli operanti ad alta quota (all’epoca i caccia e i bombardieri alleati operavano generalmente tra gli 8.000 e i 10.000 metri, per tenersi lontano dalla portata dell’artiglieria contraerea tedesca) in condizioni climatiche adeguate (nelle foto si nota neve sul terreno e sui tetti, quindi devono essere state scattate in inverno o all’inizio della primavera, quando le temperature, soprattutto in quota, sono assai basse). Sono numerosissime, dato che nel corso delle missioni di bombardamento sulla Germania, fra 1944 and 1945, were simultaneously in the sky many hundreds of aircraft (and in many cases, were thousands). They are very persistent, and this because of the powerful piston engines that drove these aircraft, engines driven at maximum performance in the flight of war, designed to provide sufficient power to the majority share as possible (see also the case with the aid of chemical additives, while if short term) but not to be "clean" means the amount of unburned oil and other particulates from the exhaust was impressive by our standards today (go and watch some films of which shows the power of the giant radial engines of a B-17 or B-29 before a mission and see what comes out ...), so these large particulate emissions at high altitude just favored the condensation of moisture in the atmosphere, a phenomenon which, as noted, occurs precisely in the so-called "condensation nuclei "and the subsequent formation of ice crystals. In other words, ideal conditions to the formation of numerous especially persistent contrails. Also add that the quality of fuels used in wartime was not even remotely comparable with that of today: it was so low that you designed and applied various devices to remedy catalysts, which were inspired some good models on the market today for installation on standard vehicles.
So, how can you equate the scenario just outlined, particularly given the simultaneous presence in the skies of several hundred (if not thousands) of aircraft, as today, arguing that these are only the contrails produced by normal commercial traffic? Perhaps a combined presentation of sound reasoning that is more than a few incontrovertible facts mental masturbation, lust and evocation of unlikely protagonists of "experts", coupled with the continued use of scorn and ridicule in order to disguise the paucity of their arguments (as exemplified by the story unlikely migration of spiders as responsible for the relapse of filaments, in every way worthy of that made at that time to explain crop circles, produced by the frantic chase in the fields of pairs of sea urchins in love ...).
One thing is certain: I will not be drawn into a sterile controversy, as happened to the great Massimo Mazzucco who sacrificed sleep to refute point by point to Attivissimo on various issues relating to 11 September 2001, without a draw from the spider hole (as far as the death knell for Attivissimo be played in the recent and scientifically documented discovery of highly sophisticated Termite between the collected dust at Ground Zero ...) I do not know how to earn a living, and Mr. Attivissimo how I can reconcile his work with the great deal of time and energy it takes in an attempt to disassemble, refute, ridicule and demonize issues of importance such as chemtrails, manipulation of the climate and September 11 (and even UFOs, for that matter), on which anyone with good will, without bias, independence of thought and sound discernment can find a monumental amount of documentation and separate fact from fanciful conjecture, the truth from the disinformation, information from buffalo . I prefer to spend very little free time I can carve out a more challenging work in more positive activities and rewarding from a social perspective.
The fact remains that the healthy and honest public debate there has been, and it was not me (nor Dr. Pattera, for that matter) to miss the appointment. Could it be that among all those that are looking at the bottom of the largest buffalo is really him?