Wow, 100%, i.e without a shadow of a doubt?!
Obviously never read it....I guess it wasnt the Guardian or CNN, or whatever leftist propaganda you have in Finland.
Read it? It's a video? Yes, I took a look at it and read some discussions about it.
Why do you keep doing the personal attacks instead of proper discussion/debate, please?
Is the following discussion about this just rubbish, disinformation, lies, or are the arguments presented sound?
Might be a clue there.
Can anyone find any errors or dishonesties in this debunking, please?
Even better if it has nothing to do with the Luciferian UN. Of course the UN would fully approve of geo-engineering and the whole climate change scam, for attaining planetary control. Thanks. On a cursory glance I have no argument with it, metabunk seems to think the UN would give credibility to this which is why they are pointing out it has nothing to do with them, the opposite is true. Do some research into the founding of the UN and the Lucis (Lucifer) Trust.
The point was that you are indiscriminately posting claims which aren't true. ("The United Nations Exposes Chemtrails: 100% PROOF We Are Being Poisoned")
Yeah, sure you can weasel yourself out of the debate by doing the old switcheroo. You could have added the accusation that I'm probably a UN shill for even better effect.
Yes, I'm well aware of the nature of the UN and of the Lucis Trust.
Is what she says untrue, no doubt you think so as you don't believe in chemtrails? You always nit-pick on minutae.So it wasn't the UN then, ok, you are right on that point. Third time I have told you that.....I can't even be bothered checking...
Tell me, how come if you do know all these conspiracies exist, the only time you EVER contribute to these forums is to back up some government or NWO agenda? Any opinion on man-made climate change yet, do you still believe in it? Like I said before in real life I wouldn't give you the time of day, why waste my time with a sheeple. Perhaps one day you can start a topic regarding a Government lie or a satanic agenda. I have learned nothing from you at all. My mistake is engaging with you, most don't, they are better than I.
Personally I need no written evidence for chemtrails. I remember what the skies used to look like a few decades ago, I won't be convinced by any MSM article or photoshopped pics of Sopwith Camels you can come up with. I have hardly studied the subject as I don't need to, it's obvious.
Are you referring to some specific thing she said or the whole video. Is she somehow special, an expert, or why should one take extra consideration to her words?
It just does not seem like very hard hitting stuff and with no sources to back up what she is saying.
I believe that one needs to look at each piece of evidence carefully. I would not call that nit-picking on minutae.
I've not been able to get a clear understanding of the subject...
Surprise surprise but this is real life.
What kind of a lousy straw-man argument is this. Have I posted photoshopped pics of Sopwith Camels, please?
I refer you to the above statement of mine and will leave it at that. If you can not understand whether or not climate change exists you will also fail to understand why the need to create it via geo-engineering, though no doubt this has other reasons also. The big picture....hopefully you grasp this concept one day.
You take everything literally, perhaps they were b17 bombers....
So because of that you can ignore the fact that flight travel has massively increased and that there appears to be a correlation between atmospheric moisture and the formation of persitent contrails? What about other variables. Airplane/engine designs/variables now vs 20 or 30 years ago. And the old photos of persitent contrails or mentionings in multiple books is another thing you must brush aside too?
How are they using geo-engineering to for instance create storms? Are the jet-stream events we are feeling in Europe now created using geo-engineering?
Is it HAARP?
I have a hard time understanding how HAARP can affect events far away since it has a very limited range.
Heathrow passenger numbers lowest for 50 years " Heathrow airport has said its passenger numbers fell to their lowest level for 50 years in 2021
Tell me did chemtrails disappear during the plandemic??? Seems not according to this channel https://www.youtube.com/@davehollyuk5585/videos and don't do your usual and pick one video out of the whole selection to try and discredit the gist of what I am saying. Remember you pointed to increased air traffic as the cause not me.
If all airplanes stopped flying during the plandemic then the persistent contrails probably also stopped completely. However all airplanes did not stop flying during the pandemic.
Here's a study on it titled: Impact of COVID-19-Related Air Traffic Reductions on the Coverage and Radiative Effects of Linear Persistent Contrails Over Conterminous United States and Surrounding Oceanic Routes
So apparently the "chem" is coming out of the engines in his videos?
If all that "white stuff" coming out of the engines comes from inside the airplane the logistics would be impossible. The plane could not carry that much "white stuff" to make these trails. It's quite simple maths.
An example from the "icebudget" thread on metabunk
example 1
The largest tanker in the world, the 747 supertanker, with a capacity of ~20,000 gallons.
Even at a low dispersal rate of 1 gallon per 100 feet traveled, you could only carry on doing so for 2,000,000 feet(20,000 * 100), or 378 miles... and that's a laughable dispersal rate at best. No matter what chemical I imagine that's nowhere near enough to create thick enough clouds to be visible from the ground and coagulant enough that they aren't ripped apart by atmospheric winds.
Also conveniently ignored by believers is the fact that there's only one such plane in the world...
example 2
OK, if no one else is going to have a crack at this, I will.
There is a web page that answers "How much does a cloud weigh?"
http://mentalfloss.com/article/49786/how-much-does...
It goes with 0.5 gram per cubic metre for water content. These units are unfamilar to youse in America so I will convert to the Imperial measures of ounces and feet.
At 28.3 grams per ounce and 35.3 cubic feet in a cubic metre, that works out to 0.000499 ounces per cubic foot.
That seems small. How small? Apparently there are 22700 grains in a pound of rice.
That is 1419 grains of rice in an ounce. So 0.000499 ounces is 0.709 of a grain of rice; less than one grain of rice in a cubic foot of air! Very small amount! Crikey... let's press on.
Consider a trail.. let's say its a couple of wing spans wide and deep, and 10 miles long.
At an altitude of 7 miles (36000 feet), and at an elevation of 45 degrees, 10 miles fits between your hands held up with 54 degrees between them; way less than horizon to horizon.
At the cruising speed of 511 mph a A320 covers 8.52 miles per minute which means 1.17 minutes (70 seconds) to cover 10 miles.
So a 10 mile trail is pretty short in the general scheme of things.
Pressing on...
width 200 feet, depth 200 feet, length 10 miles which is 52800 feet.
So the volume of our bit of trail is 2,112,000,000 cubic feet.
The trail contains material at the concentration of 0.000499 ounces per cubic foot.
That is 1054782.8 ounces;
divide by 16 to get 65923.9pounds;
divide by 2240 to get 29.4 tons.
So, 10 miles of trail weighs 29.4 tons.
Many of the planes seen making trails are A320s. According to the Wikipedia on the A320 family ( Airbus A320 family - Wikipedia )
the operational empty weight is 87000 pounds which is 38.8 tons.
Also the maximum take off weight is 150000 pounds which is 67.0 tons.
So the maximum payload plus fuel of an A320 is 28.1 tons.
But wait! The 10 mile trail contains 29.4 tons of material. That is MORE than the maximum payload total. We have not loaded any fuel, crew, passengers or their luggage and freight!
So the material in the trail is NOT coming out of the plane, is it.
And also non-persistent trails are also chemtrails? This one disappears quickly.
Example:
The planes appear to be commercial jets.
Why doesn't he identify the planes using Flightradar24 or similar?
Which one do you recommend then?
It went back to 1970's levels when there were no chemtrails.That was my point. Try and think critically.
I don't, just making the point that there were chemtrails during the plandemic even though flight numbers were back to 1970's levels. It disproves that theory of yours, that chemtrails are due to increased flights nowadays.
Go outside in Finland at this time of year and breath out? What do you see? Mist billowing out of your mouth? Now if vapour in the air at say 0 degrees C or below, when sucked through an engine would surely be heated up to produce what you call a contrail even at ground level, this would hold true if your theory is correct. Is that your observation at Helsinki Airport?
Contrails are ice...
Thats what I mean why aren't they then visible when the plane has just taken off or before that, when say its below zero.