continues, after a long pause, the public debate with Tom Woods Nexus on the phenomenon of "Chemtrails." The previous installments are published here (the first) and here (the second). All mail posted here are published with permission of Tom Woods and me.
December 16, 2009 on 16/12/2009
Tom Bosco tells me a letter an expert forecast, Domenico Azzopardi, the magazine Nimbus. and asks me a comment. The letter seems to confirm authoritatively the existence of anomalous contrails. They took off for the recurrence of lunar landings and I have to postpone the answer. Wonder if Woods has subsequently conducted the experiment that was announced a few months before, but Woods said he "delegate the matter e la cosa si è un po' impantanata" .
17 luglio 2010
Tom Bosco mi scrive:
Gentile Paolo, non ci sentiamo da un bel pezzo e mi domandavo se riuscisse a trovare il tempo di commentare questo video estremamente interessante:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IIJ_186P8U&feature=player_embedded
Cordiali saluti
Tom Bosco/NEXUS
Il video in questione è questo:
21 luglio 2010
Rispondo a Tom Bosco:
Buongiorno Tom,
sono rientrato adesso da un viaggio e ho visto il video. Mi sembra chiaro oltre ogni ragionevole dubbio che si tratti di contrail aerodinamiche e che la voce nel video si diverta molto nel considerare che se la ripresa va su Youtube qualcuno penserà che si tratti di una prova schiacciante di "scie chimiche". Del resto, il video è intitolato "Chemtrail spraying (NOT!)".
Come mai mi ha segnalato questo video? È molto bello, con i riflessi arcobaleno nella contrail e la sua nitida inquadratura dall'alto (presumo dalla cabina di pilotaggio di un altro velivolo), ma non mi sembra che sposti affatto i termini della questione.
Spero di poter riprendere la nostra discussione pubblica: anzi, le va bene se includo anche questo nostro scambio nella discussione?
Cordiali saluti
Paolo Attivissimo
Tom Bosco risponde:
Salve Paolo. Come può ben immaginare, non mi trovo assolutamente d'accordo con la sua analisi. Il fatto che l'autore si sia dato un gran da fare nel smentire le sue stesse riprese (il NOT è stato aggiunto solo ieri...) suggerisce invece che sia stato "pizzicato" dai suoi superiori o dalle autorità preposte e obbligato a ritrattare. Altrimenti, che motivo avrebbe avuto di commentare inizialmente un post del suo "odiato" Marcianò scrivendo:
Nice job tanker enemy... I like the enhancements. Btw, I took the video while We Were flying over Canada. Thanks for translating the video I Will Understand more people what's going on. I'll post more as I See Them.
addition, the dialogue between the pilots is not true that one says that "if the shot goes on Youtube that someone will think this is compelling evidence of 'chemtrails'." Do not fool ourselves. The dialogue is more or less:
"You see that sprays the chemical trail?"
"Yeah,"
"We are right on top of them"
"fact"
"I guess I'll put it on youtube"
"It's like something splashes dall'estradosso wings"
On the other hand, I just can not understand how one can speak of "contrails" aerodynamic in this case, where you can see very well that this is something completely different, but so ... As usual, everyone sees what they want to see. Of course, this may include my comment to our discussion.
soon!
Tom Bosco / NEXUS
I reply to Bosco (paragraphs in smaller font are quotes from previous messages to Bosco):
Hi Paul. As you can imagine, I am not entirely agree with his analysis. The fact that the author has given a great deal to do in the denying his own times (the NOT was added only yesterday ...) suggests instead that it was "pinched" by his superiors or by the authorities and forced to recant.
Or the author hath been given to do to disprove because he now has realized that supporters of "chemtrails" are taken as true what began as a joke to make fun of them. Just like the famous photo of the 'inside of a chemical tanker, "she pointed out that as fake in Paradise conference last year.
Which of the two hypotheses best fits the facts?
a) A pilot takes a contrail very nice and decided to put the video on YouTube to make fun of the supporters of the "chemtrails" and continues to taunt them (discussing "nice job", "good job" on Tanker Enemy) when the bait.
b) A pilot incorporates an ultra-top-secret military and puts it in plain sight on YouTube, where it is easy to trace who posted the video, with all the disastrous consequences of the case.
If they were the authorities to pinch, it's really hard to think that they would leave an online video that shows in great detail the operation of their technology secret. They removed the video directly.
Otherwise, what reason would have to comment on a post of his initially "hated" Mark wrote: If
"hated" refers to any of my feelings towards Rosario Marciano, is an expression del tutto fuori luogo. Ma non ha importanza.
Nice job tanker enemy... I like the enhancements. Btw, I took the video while we were flying over Canada. Thanks for translating the video so more people will understand what's going on. I'll post more as I see them.
Lo so, l'umorismo dei piloti a volte è difficile da cogliere.
Inoltre, nel dialogo fra i piloti non è affatto vero che uno dice che "se la ripresa va su Youtube qualcuno penserà che si tratti di una prova schiacciante di 'scie chimiche'." Non prendiamoci in giro. Il dialogo è più o meno:
"Lo vedi che spruzza la scia chimica?"
"Già"
"We are right on top of them"
"fact"
"I guess I'll put it on youtube"
"It's like something splashes dall'estradosso wings"
transcribe verbatim, to the extent than you can understand in the audio very disturbed:
1:00 (the first is not spoken): Person who
resumed: "You see it ... You see HIM That chemtrail spraying?"
Other person: "Yeah. Good luck we're above him".
PCR: "I know."
AP: "'Cause We'd be dead right now!"
AP: [inaudible]
PCR: "I'm gonna put this on Youtube."
AP: (Laughs) "Are you videoing it right now?"
(pause)
AP: "Oh God, do not ... do not video it right now!"
PCR: "It's like it's spraying out of the top wings of ITS."
AP: "Do not Do not Do Any ... [inaudible]."
and humor. The tone of the laughter and the voice of the person, "pleads" not to resume, is unmistakable.
Not to mention that 'It's like "is" as if sprayed. Are you saying that _somiglia_ in a spray, then it is not.
Apart from anything else, the basic problem remains: why the authors of an alleged conspiracy would be so secretive and dangerous scoundrels to dissolve a video that shows their deadly work and then leave it even published?
On the other hand, I just can not understand how one can speak of "contrails" aerodynamic again, where you can see very well that this is something completely different
Not really. The aerodynamic contrail is formed regularly on the wing surfaces. This phenomenon is well known and documented. One example among many: a Lufthansa Airbus A330, D-AIMC brands, flying over the North Sea August 10, 2004. Photo by Sigurdur Benediktsson, published Airliners.net .
Here you find links to technical publications that describe the known aerodynamic phenomenon of contrails.
http://sciechimicheinfo.blogspot.com/2008/10/16-perche-ci-sono-anche-fotografie-in.html
I find it rather surprising that a driver like you are not aware of these phenomena and this documentation. He tried to discuss with his colleagues in flight?
, but so ... As usual, everyone sees what they want to see. Of course, this may include my comment to our discussion.
Fine, I'll do it willingly.
soon!
Tom Bosco / NEXUS
Sincerely
Paul.
Bosco replied
> Hi Paul. As you can imagine, I am not entirely agree with his analysis. The fact that the author has given a great deal to do in the denying his own times (the NOT was added only yesterday ...) suggests instead that it was "pinched" by his superiors or by the authorities and forced to recant .
Or the author hath been given to do to disprove because he now has realized that supporters of "chemtrails" are taken as true what began as a joke to make fun of them. Just like the famous photo of the 'inside of a chemical tanker " that you yourself pointed as a forgery in Paradise conference last year.
Which of the two hypotheses best fits the facts?
a) A pilot takes a contrail very nice and decided to put the video on YouTube to make fun of the supporters of the "chemtrails" and continues to taunt them (discussing "nice job", "good job" on Tanker Enemy) as bait.
b) A pilot incorporates an ultra-top-secret military and puts it in plain sight on YouTube, where it is easy to trace who posted the video, with all the negative consequences of caso.
Se fossero state le autorità a pizzicarlo, è davvero difficile pensare che avrebbero lasciato online un video che mostrasse in grande dettaglio il funzionamento della loro tecnologia segretissima. Avrebbero rimosso il video direttamente.
Converrà con me che è difficile rimuovere qualcosa che nel frattempo è stato scaricato e postato altrove da centinaia di persone, no? Vero è che la persona in questione avrebbe dovuto essere più prudente e dar retta al collega: "Oh God, don't... don't video it right now!" e "Don't... don't do any [incomprensibile]."
› Altrimenti, che motivo avrebbe avuto first to comment on a post of his "hated" Mark wrote:
If "hated" refers to any of my feelings towards Rosario Marciano, is an expression completely out of place. But it does not matter.
I had put in quotation marks to be ironic about his well-known lack of sympathy towards Rosario Marciano, though I apologize for that ...
> Nice job tanker enemy ... I like the enhancements. Btw, I Took the video while we where flying over Canada. Thanks for translating the video I Will Understand more people what's going on. I'll post more as I See Them.
I know, the humor of the drivers is sometimes difficult to observe.
Be ', and I have the pilot, I think, even with a smile, but in this case I just can not catch him ...
> Also, in the dialogue between the pilots is not true that one says that "if the shot goes on Youtube that someone will think this is compelling evidence of 'chemtrails'." Do not fool ourselves. The dialogue is more or less: > "You see that sprays the chemical trail?"
> "Yeah,"
> "We are right above them"
> "fact"
› "Mi sa che lo metterò su youtube"
› "È come se spruzzasse qualcosa dall'estradosso delle ali"
Trascrivo testualmente, nei limiti di quanto si riesce a capire nell'audio molto disturbato:
1:00 (prima non c'è parlato):
Persona che riprende: "You see it... You see him spraying that chemtrail?"
Altra persona: "Yeah. Good luck we're above him".
PCR: "I know."
AP: "'Cause we'd be dead right now!"
AP: [incomprensibile]
PCR: "I'm gonna put this on Youtube."
AP: (Laughs) "Are you videoing it right now?"
(pause)
AP: "Oh God, do not ... do not video it right now!"
PCR: "It's like it's spraying out of the top wings of ITS."
AP: "Do not Do not Do Any ... [inaudible]."
and humor. The tone of the laughter and the voice of the person, "pleads" not to resume, is unmistakable.
Maybe it will be clear to you, but not for me ... or for many other people, a couple of them professional drivers in business.
Not to mention that 'It's like "is" as if sprayed. Are you saying that _somiglia_ in a spray, then it is not.
Or perhaps "it is as if originating from the spray."
Apart from anything else, the basic problem remains: why the authors of an alleged conspiracy would be so secretive and dangerous scoundrels to dissolve a video that shows their deadly work and then leave it even published?
In fact, when they realized the "crap" they put a piece ... (See my earlier comment) just as they say here in the Veneto, "This is Pezo el Tacon of Buso (the patch is worse than the hole).
> On the other hand, I just can not understand how one can speak of "contrails" aerodynamic again, where you can see perfectly well that is something completely different
Not really. The aerodynamic contrail is formed regularly on the wing surfaces. It is a phenomenon well known and documented. One example among many: a Lufthansa Airbus A330, D-AIMC brands, flying over the North Sea August 10, 2004. Photo by Sigurdur Benediktsson, posted on Airliners.net.
Here you find links to technical publications that describe the well-known phenomenon of aerodynamic contrails.
http://sciechimicheinfo.blogspot.com/2008/10/16-perche-ci-sono-anche-fotografie-in.html
I find it rather surprising that as a pilot she is not aware of these phenomena and this documentation. He tried to discuss with his colleagues in flight?
am fully aware of these phenomena, just not what I observe in the video. And, yes, I have discussed with some fellow drivers. In this regard, I will tell you that time, I blend a rather interesting and I think it is time to translate it into reality, but do not ask me what it is ... I would not spoil the surprise! A little 'patience, and you will see ...
> but there you are ... As usual, everyone sees what they want to see. Of course, this may include my comment to our discussion.
Fine, I'll do it willingly. There
account. Of course also add these notations ...
>
> next time!
>
> Tom Woods / NEXUS
Sincerely
Paul.
Aloha
Tom
The discussion continues here .
0 comments:
Post a Comment