PhD Chemist Whistleblower, who worked 17 years developing Chemtrails said 90% of Chemtrails Designed to Alter Emotions, Mood, State of Mind and Provoke “Flu-like Symptoms”
POISON THE POPULACE TO SLEEP, SLEEP, SLEEP … | THE WIZARD OF OZ
1 Like
I believe that this fantastical claim is quite improbable since there probably exists so many copies of various movies that Disney owns that someone would notice the discrepencies quickly. I'm quite a movie buff and know how meticulously movie fans know every single detail of their favorite movies.
Another thing that doesn't make sense is that there already exists tons of historical evidence of persistent contrails.
See:-
TIP OF THE DAY:
Having trouble refuting the message? Try the Quick and Easy Way* (TM) to reply to this message
- Attack the messenger: Claim that Metabunk is government disinformation.
- Attack the poster: Ask how many booster shot he has taken.
*Not related to The Way
I am 63 I remember how contrails used to look like, This will not convince me otherwise. More subterfuge and deception I suspect. They used to disperse very quickly, not anymore. But hey believe what ever that book tells you, I will believe my memory. Oh and in the 70's I lived on the MAIN flight path from London Heathrow to the USA, so I am sure the "evidence" you have bears no relation to reality.
Sometimes they disperse very quickly and sometimes they don't. It all depends on variables such as the conditions in the atmosphere.
One thing one can now do is look at atmospheric weather reports and predict if contrails will persist or not in the coming days.
Quick look into how much air traffic amounts have changed:
- 30 years ago (early 1990s): Roughly 50-60% less air traffic.
- 40 years ago (1980s): Around 70-80% less air traffic.
- 50 years ago (1970s): Approximately 90-95% less air traffic.
- 60 years ago (1960s): Roughly 95-98% less air traffic.
That book? It's a whole collection of old books mentioning persistent contrails.
Any detailed theories, please?
So, what are the variables comparing then and now? 90-95% less air traffic, different kinds of airplanes/engines... fuels? altitudes? contrail entourage effect? and probably some other's that we would need to take into consideration when evaluating this issue.
At that time LHR was the world's busiest airport, so no my view isn't based on seeing a couple of planes a month, but multiple per hour over a decade.
Mentioning one per book in his cherry-picked selection ie its an exception not the norm unlike today. It's not proof that persistent contrails that form cloud masses have been around for decades, but you have taken it as meaning that. Like I said I will stick to my memory when this never happened decades ago.
I don't quite understand your reasoning.
I've given you a link to quite a few old books showing and explaining persistent contrails and quite a few pre 1995 of persistent contrails but somehow you say that "It's not proof that persistent contrails that form cloud masses have been around for decades". How?
Bonus question: How come planes in WW2 left persistent contrails sometimes?
Very much EXCEPTIONS to the rule, RARELY seen, I never saw them myself in the 70's, on returning to the same town I had left decades earlier having moved abroad (returning around 2010) the whole sky was full of persistent chemtrails. Until then I, like you thought chemtrails was a kooky conspiracy theory. I had not become used to their introduction like some boiling frog. I had 2 terms of reference decades apart. Where I live now in Asia, I have only noticed chemtrails here within the past year and I have lived in the same place 20 years, they are still rare here. What I would conclude is that the west ie the Goyim are the main target of these chemtrails.
Did you run those WW2 photos through Google AI to check whether they are fakes? Like Putin was shown recently?
I don't remember seeing them in the 80s or 90s. 2000 or so was when I noticed them. However I believe I first noticed them only when I had read about the chemtrail theory, so it was kind of a confirmation bias thing.
Still, I believed the questions I've brought up can't be ignored. Here's a new one: Which "Disney Movies" did this guy allegedly modify for 60 million dollars?
I didn't need to. I've seen them over 10 years ago already and believe them to be genuine.
Is this AI reliable? Do you trust what AI says?
Fake" for AI just means that a photo doesn't match the terabytes of other photos it has to draw on. The AI probably was not trained on photos that were taken from the surface of the moon and is not going to be able to identify it.
There's also plenty of video of ww2 persistent contrails
Also note how the trails "turn off" as some variable changes (throttle lowered, altitude change or change atmospheric conditions...)
https://rense.com/general32/WWIIcontrailphotos.htm
World World II Contrail Photos -
Not Chemtrails
From Paul S. Szymanski
[email protected]
12-13-2
Jeff,
Some time ago, you posted a message from me requesting anyone who had pictures of contrails, as we have been seeing in our skies the past few years, taken before about 1990 to send them in. So far, the only one I have received is the one you posted.
Recently, using a good search engine, I went looking for contrails from WWII. I was confidant that I would find such pictures, for I have often seen contrails in photos and films of WWII bombers and fighter aircraft. I was not surprised, therefore to find many (I have attached three). What did surprise me, however, is that I found that there are contrail "debunker" sites that use these photos as evidence or "proof" that the persistent contrails we see today are somehow "normal." This is not a correct assertion for it assumes that the constituents of the exhaust gasses of WWII piston-powered aircraft are the same as the exhaust gasses of a jet engine. This is simply untrue.
The modern turbojet engine is one of the most efficient, clean-burning internal combustion engines ever put into service. Particulates in the exhaust are practically nil. WWII aircraft engines, as good as they were for the era, are a different story altogether.
By their nature, carbureted or mechanically fuel injected, reciprocating engines do not burn the fuel perfectly, they are often very good, but not perfect. This results in unburned hydrocarbons and carbon particulates. Also, such engines are not run with a perfect stoichiometric mixture of fuel and air. That is, they are run slightly fuel rich. This is because a lean mixture tends to burn much hotter causing possible damage, often terminal, to the engine. Better to err on the side of rich than lean. Those familiar with engine tuning know about this. And a rich mixture, even slightly so as in a properly tuned engine, produces carbon particulates. Anyone who has ever had an engine with a stuck choke has seen the effects of an extremely rich mixture- black smoke.
Further, WWII aircraft engines used prodigious amounts of oil. In part to lubricate the cylinder walls and rings to avoid piston seizure. This was particularly true in high-performance radial engines where the piston/cylinder wall clearance is greater than in a water-cooled engine. The oil would wind up getting into the combustion chamber and was exhausted as smoke. Or, blow-by gasses got into the crankcase and were expelled through a breather as smoke.
All these effects were admittedly small, so that there was not necessarily any discernable smoke from a normally running engine. But the particulates produced, especially from a bomber with a full load or a fighter in a dogfight at full power, were significant as compared to a modern turbojet. Enough to effect the formation and persistence of contrails. Therefore, if anything, these photos of WWII contrails provide evidence that the persistent contrails we see today are NOT normal, that some particulate matter is being injected into the exhaust gasses of the jets to make the contrails persistent.
In addition, as I perused many so-called "chemtrail" sites, both debunkers and conspiracy theorists, some good, others not so good, I found much that was distasteful: vicious name-calling, innuendo, claims and counter-claims, much unsubstantiated, a lot of self-righteousness and pointless fighting. Does this not serve the purposes of our enemy, whoever he is? And, I found a lot of people who send in photographs of their home skies, as on you site, and simply say, "I know this is not right. What is going on?" And we get no answers.
I have lived 54 years, in the Midwest, in Northern and Southern California and here in Oregon. I can't remember ever seeing a persistent contrail. Then, SUDDENLY, beginning on January 1, 2001, hardly a day goes by that the sky is not filled with them. And don't tell me that I simply have not been paying attention, I do. I have had a life-long fascination with the sky and everything in it. I do not know what is being done or why or by whom. I have no inside information. I have no connections to the Halls of Power. I am just a man who knows what he sees in front of his own eyes. I know this is not right. What is going on?
Paul S. Szymanski
Eugene, Oregon
[email protected]
Please note the last paragraph...
It identified the Chinese mission as being genuine.
Smart Guy,
Without knowing how big a difference there is between modern jet exhaust and WW2 prop planes and how these exhausts behave in various atmospheres it is just an unverified claim/theory.
Aerodynamic contrails can also form as propeller and wingtip vortices:
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/f38p9g/c130_what_are_the_odds/
It's quite a science Hybrid Contrails – Contrail Science
I have not found much about this case. What AI software and how were they using it? How was it trained. Can it distinguish between digital photos and scanned film negatives.
Hilariously in the video they say that their own AI will be biasless 
sure
But they did use the CIA/Google one nevertheless, presumably they will have to shut this down now, like a previous Previous AI - Tay -which turned out to be "Anti-semitic" 
So they claim but we don't know for certain. And you can't just trust them like that, can you? Or their claim that their own AI will be without bias. And like I said, we don't know any of the details or why the AI said what it said.
Besides, we have a whole thread here that should clearly show that the moon landings were not faked. However that topic of forbidden here so let's not talk about it.
I would rather trust them than fact checkers with an agenda, claiming photos are real when they are obviously faked, the AI just confirms this. The western CIA/Google AI did confirm the unmanned Chinese expedition was real so you should be happy about that 
But let's not go there it's banned