I will say what I have seen and that's about it as far as 'claims.' Do you know what the Appleman chart is? It tells you the specific conditions under which the different types of contrails will or will not be possible. Nasa said non-persistent trails were rare and persistent trails were rarer still in their study on contrails. I have not had a link to that info for a long time but they definitely stated it. All anyone would have to know is the temp and humidity relative to ice in the flight path and check it against the appleman chart to predict the outcome.
Look, I used to believe in ChemTrails by default just like I used to believe "Democrats want democracy" long ago.
But when I got recently challenged, I decided to dig into it, and the more I dug the more I realised its all based on "gaslighting" and getting a bunch of influencers to keep using that word.
I said it already - we are being poisoned in every direction. But the one word used to describe it is a red herring. Go figure.
If you are still skeptical, go and do your own digging. Take it as a project to convince yourself one way or another.
I understand what you’re saying, but there’s no other word to use. Geo-engineering, cloud seeding, whatever they are doing it’s happening and more public figures are talking about it as the Great awakening marches on, much like any other topic.
They are poisoning us in every direction, one of those being the sky. Blanketed and covered in a veil. Especially here on the East Coast.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
No, not every jet liner is doing it. Not every passenger plane is doing it. Heck they even spray from the ground, from the sea, however it’s being done something is being done. Again I’m not sure what you’re getting at and I don’t wish to continue trying to prove it here, I think the video should speak for itself, as it’s just another topic Tucker covers who happens to be in the midst of covering everything we are about, and is in the center of the media Storm of censorship disinfo misinfo etc.
No way to know for certain if Elon, Tucker, et all, heck I’d even go as far and say Trump or Q from a logical standpoint, we can’t trust anyone.
What do you mean the actual books? I told you I know persistent trails have been seen since before jets so I think that covers it. Your point is actually that your sources don't mention that persistent trails are historically rarer than non-persistent therefore it's bullshit? That's funny.
The annual-mean global coverage of line-shaped contrails is small (about 0.1% for the year 2002); however, regional coverage can be much higher (about 2% in the United States and Europe) over active air traffic areas
2% is not "rare". Its consistent with the fact that as number of flights increase we will start noticing them more and more often. Your data. You are the one who deferred to NASA on this.
So, the onus is on you to now prove that the "persistent contrails" are different from the non persistent and contains nefarious chemicals.
If your entire belief of chemtrails revolves around the reduction in rarity of persistent contrails, I would suggest you re-evaluate that belief system.
I will say what I have seen and that's about it as far as 'claims.' Do you know what the Appleman chart is? It tells you the specific conditions under which the different types of contrails will or will not be possible. Nasa said non-persistent trails were rare and persistent trails were rarer still in their study on contrails. I have not had a link to that info for a long time but they definitely stated it. All anyone would have to know is the temp and humidity relative to ice in the flight path and check it against the appleman chart to predict the outcome.
Okay, when you find this study then we can discuss this discussion.
I, on. the other hand, found you the actual books, publication dates and photos, so at this point the supposed Nasa claims mean really nothing.
Dang, Tucker should have YOU on his show!
Case closed! No more questions folks! Look over here ALIENS!
Look, I used to believe in ChemTrails by default just like I used to believe "Democrats want democracy" long ago.
But when I got recently challenged, I decided to dig into it, and the more I dug the more I realised its all based on "gaslighting" and getting a bunch of influencers to keep using that word.
I said it already - we are being poisoned in every direction. But the one word used to describe it is a red herring. Go figure.
If you are still skeptical, go and do your own digging. Take it as a project to convince yourself one way or another.
I understand what you’re saying, but there’s no other word to use. Geo-engineering, cloud seeding, whatever they are doing it’s happening and more public figures are talking about it as the Great awakening marches on, much like any other topic.
They are poisoning us in every direction, one of those being the sky. Blanketed and covered in a veil. Especially here on the East Coast.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
No, not every jet liner is doing it. Not every passenger plane is doing it. Heck they even spray from the ground, from the sea, however it’s being done something is being done. Again I’m not sure what you’re getting at and I don’t wish to continue trying to prove it here, I think the video should speak for itself, as it’s just another topic Tucker covers who happens to be in the midst of covering everything we are about, and is in the center of the media Storm of censorship disinfo misinfo etc.
No way to know for certain if Elon, Tucker, et all, heck I’d even go as far and say Trump or Q from a logical standpoint, we can’t trust anyone.
What do you mean the actual books? I told you I know persistent trails have been seen since before jets so I think that covers it. Your point is actually that your sources don't mention that persistent trails are historically rarer than non-persistent therefore it's bullshit? That's funny.
I think you did not read my comment fully. Here is the point you missed:
And I guess its too much trouble for a chemtrail warrior to find the supposed data from NASA that you rely on in your argument.
So, I did it for you.
Here is the paper abstract from NASA
Here is the full paper
2% is not "rare". Its consistent with the fact that as number of flights increase we will start noticing them more and more often. Your data. You are the one who deferred to NASA on this.
So, the onus is on you to now prove that the "persistent contrails" are different from the non persistent and contains nefarious chemicals.
If your entire belief of chemtrails revolves around the reduction in rarity of persistent contrails, I would suggest you re-evaluate that belief system.
I should have to prove claims I did not make.