There is *no* change over time. In 1970, and in 2000, they sometimes linger and sometimes dissolve.
Some days, they criss-cross the whole sky. Some days, there isn't a one to be seen.
Does the term "relative humidity" mean anything to you?
By the way, have you ever taken a flight on a jet plane from one major airport to another?
Silas (I have...and loved it!) Sparkhammer
Posted by Jow Kewl on :
Well, we can examine the article's claim about the Congressional bill:
On October 2, 2001, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) introduced the "Space Preservation Act of 2001" (HR 2977), which called for the elimination of "exotic weaponry" from space. Among the weapons to be banned were weather-modifying weapons such as HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) and chemtrails. Though HR 3616 was later amended to remove the section that would have banned chemtrails, the original bill acknowledging the existence of chemtrail technology remains on the pages of the Congressional Record.
(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
So yes, "chemtrails" are explicitly described in the bill.
However, we may note that many other "weapons" listed in this section are hypothetical at best. It may well be possible that Rep. Kucinich has no specific knowledge of chemtrails, but has merely included them in an effort to create an umbrella bill which covers all conceivable types of weapons.
Moonbow learned of this today when I called Congressman Kucinich's office in Ohio and asked for a definition of the word "chemtrails" as it appears in HR 2977 bill that was submitted to Congress on October 2, 2001. I was told that I was the first person to call about the wording of that bill and also the first person to ask about the word "chemtrails" in it. Apparently, the Congressman's office is not aware that Chemtrails are a large phenomena on the internet and it appeared that no one in his office knew anything about what a "chemtrail" actually was! They were apparently equally not aware that HR 2977 has become the subject of controversy in that it lists "chemtrails" along side other military "space weapons" technology (see bill listed here). Kucinich's office asked for Moonbow's URL so that they could become more familiar with what "chemtrails" are all about.
This seems to confirm our suspicions that Kucinich wasn't really aware of what "chemtrails" were when he composed the bill. What's more, the proof above is coming from a conspiracy website.
So what about the mysterious rewriting of HR 2977 to become bill HR 3616? Again, if we go to http://thomas.loc.gov, we find that not only has the item about chemtrails been removed, but also the entire section dealing with "exotic weapons systems." Seems the editing didn't specifically target chemtrails after all, but all hypothetical weapons. Why?
...the reason for this change is not because of less concern about the issues whose mention is deleted in the revised Bill, but rather to make it more certain that the text as rewritten actually passes into international law before the June 13, 2002, ABM Treaty abrogation date set by President Bush, without having to spend inordinate amounts of time explaining the below related issues to the general public in such short time to get this accomplished...
Which seems to make sense to me.
Posted by Pseudo_Croat on :
Well...Guess I'll have to put the Earth Island Institute on my list of enviromental organizations that don't see the forest for the trees...my, this list is getting long.
As for the reason contrails may be lingering longer these days...perhaps, as Silas said, an increase in relative humidity throughout the US? Could this be a side effect of global warming?
Hasn't the chemtrail/contrail controversy been discussed before in this forum? IIRC, there was a Web site debunking chemtrails that invariably gets mentioned in such threads.
- Pseudo "Gaia wants environmental fruits, not ecological nuts" Croat
Posted by Bonnie on :
I recall that when the whole chemtrails/contrails-conspiracy-bit came up on the message board about 4 years ago, then-poster Jay Reynolds dived right in and made a real nuisance of himself with chemtrail-believers on the internet. Jay and I traded a few e-mails about contrails, but since our interests diverged (I was more interested in what folks were saying about "the conspiracy," while he was more interested in debunking "the conspiracy"), I sort of lost track of what he was doing.
In any event, this former snopester has a page devoted to debunking this evil plot.
Jay Reynolds Earth Island Journal Vol. 17, No. 4; Winter 2003
The article "Stolen Skies: The Chemtrail Mystery" (EIJ, Summer 2002), contained many inaccuracies which deserve correction. Beginning with the subtitle, "Jet Trails in the Sky Used to Disappear; Now they Linger" author William Thomas leads the reader to believe that the contrails produced by 6000 commercial airplane flights per day are actually military jets' spraying of various substances worldwide.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The chemtrails idea is a hoax and an urban legend supported by speculation, hearsay, and rumor, but no tangible evidence.