The debate about contrails and chemtrails fills in a big share of time within the discussion about the term of „chemtrails“. Mainly so called „debunkers“ put a bunch of energy into the discussion about this topic debating again and again that there are no „chemtrails“, obviously in the hope that the whole debate about the „trails“ is quieting down. The discoverer of the „chemtrails“ himself - Clifford Carnicom - does not even use the term of „chemtrail“. He prefers to describe this phenomenon in the skies as injection of aerosols. Formerly, Carnicom used the term of „chemtrails“ only once in the beginning of the publication of his „papers“ how he told us. Nevertheless, Wikipedia for example used to connect him with the Chemtrail-Movement ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AChemtrail_conspiracy_theory/Archive_1#Goferwiki_and_the_Carnicom_passage ), although he refused to use the term of chemtrails himself. In today's (October 23rd 2013) Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory ) there is still a reference made to the U.S. Air Force with „Contrail facts“ ( http://www.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-051013-001.pdf ) which leads only to a website of the U.S. Air Force with „404 Error“. Only a „cache“ version is available by Google: ( http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:p6l4ePYS1NwJ:arizonaskywatch.com/articles/articles/US%2520Air%2520Force%2520Contrail%2520Facts%25202001.pdf+&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de&client=opera ). This is obviously not the official thinking of the U.S. Air Force – otherwise it would have been kept online. Therefore the reference made in this cache document: „The 'Chemtrail' hoax has been investigated and refuted by many established and accredited universities, scientific organizations, and major media publications.“ is obviously not valid anymore. This is important as other government sources – also those in foreign countries cite exactly this reference in the German and the English wikipedia versions: „Die Air Force beantwortete zudem Theorien, dass sie das Wetter manipuliere, mit einem Informationspapier zu Kondensstreifen. Wettermanipulationen würden durch die Air Force nicht vorgenommen, und man plane auch nicht, damit zu beginnen.[5]“ ( http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail ) (Free Translation: „The Air Force answered to these theories that it would manipulate the weather with a fact sheet to contrails. Weather manipulations would not be undertaken by the U.S. Air Force, and there are no plans to start with it.“) Unfortunately, this source is not online anymore. And in the Google-cache version of „Contrail facts“ there is no citation made to identify the „many established and accredited universities, scientific organizations“ which would give credit to the allegations of the U.S. Air Force statements. Also, in the Waybackmachine there is no copy of „Contrail facts“ in the year 2005 when it was put on the website of the U.S. Air Force. There is only a copy of december 2nd 2002: http://web.archive.org/web/20021202230839/http://www.af.mil/environment/contrails_chemtrail.shtml
Despite the fact that the „chemtrail theory“ is growing popular there is no capture of the U.S. Force page refering to the topic of chemtrails as it is shown here: http://web.archive.org/web/20131017140150/http://www.af.mil/environment/contrails_chemtrail.shtml
If the U.S. Air Force has no official attitude towards „chemtrails“ anymore it appears that the allegations made by the „chemtrail theorists“ are true.

In the context of a publication by the German EPA (Umweltbundesamt) there was made reference to the European headquarter of the U.S. Air Force „Das Hauptquartier der US-Luftwaffe Europa teilte mit, dass es die beschriebenen Projekte bei der US-Luftwaffe weder gibt noch gegeben hat.“ ( http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/publikation/long/3574.pdf ), Page 1
(Free Translation: „The headquarter of the U.S. Air Force Europe informs that the described projects by the U.S. Air Force neither do not exist nor have ever existed.“) At least, the later is obviously not true because at least within the U.S. there had been such research of that kind for decades. And if one refers to the regular signature of statements made by German chancellors presented by the allied powers to him after the war until 1990 when each of them came into office one may doubt that only within the U.S. such projects happened.


Nevertheless, what kind of official government attitudes there are in the populace the term of „chemtrail“ has found common ground for its use. There must be reasons for that. And these reasons may be the reason why „debunkers“ are fighting aggressively this term, as the following citation shows:
„ 'To these fellows, you might think it is smart to bend the truth till it screams, or basically to lie about stuff because it is for the 'greater good'.
Well it's not for anyone's good when you lie and make stuff up. It comes back on you eventually, makes you a weaker person because it chains you down by enforcing lie upon lie trying to keep the previous lie afloat, and in the end it tortures your soul“ (Jay Reinolds) ( http://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-1990-usaf-academy-chemtrails-manual.352/#post-31488 )
It is a fight about image and not a fight about content and „Metadebunkers“ don't really understand what drives people. And when there would be no substance in the chemtrail theory there would be much less motivation to deal with that topic.

One of the reasons is that the U.S. Air Force Academy itself created this word.




Another reason is the use of the word in the „Space Preservation Act“ H.R. 2977 of October 2, 2001 which was introduced by Congressman Dennis Kucinich (Ohio) in the 1st (!!!!) session of the 107th Congress of the United States. It seems that this bill was politically important to Dennis Kucinich – otherwise he would have been introduced it later on during the 107th Congress of the United States. There must be reasons that Kucinich used this kind of term – otherwise he would have used the term of „Injection of aerosols“.

If the originator of the „chemtrail“-movement – Clifford Carnicom – only used this word once there must be something else that caused the boom of this term: It makes it so precise for the description of that kind of matter people care about.

The word „chemtrails“ describes the circumstance that „chemicals“ are brought out in an unreachable Space for the main public (for example, because it is expensive to make your own journey at the sudden to the air space with a specialised plane where the chemicals of the persisting contrails are suspected to be or because the air space is too much regulated for making a sudden hunting flight or the questioned air space is even closed to the main air traffic) and these chemicals shape lines of snakeclouds behind the plane like „trails“.

The picture available through the term of „chemtrails“ delivers the imagination which is so fearful that much energy and time is put into that topic connected with this term by many persons.

The „metadebunkers“ on the other side of the discussion are putting much time and energy into the destruction of the meaning of that term which makes them susceptible. They care more about the term of „chemtrails“ than the matter connected with this term. There is an imagination among „metadebunkers“ that they are the masters of „language“ ignoring that the fearfulness of this topic is based in the suspected secret poisoning of the air and the inhalation and intaking of poisonous material through air and food. The chemtrail theorists are moved by content the „metadebunkers“ are moved by keeping things they are. They are disturbed in their holy quiet world they live in. The attitude of the masters of „language“ is: The devaluation of the topic (of „chemtrails“) follows the devaluation of the term itself. In fact, the term of „aerosol injection“ sounds at first harmless. „Aerosol injection“ generally does not associate with poison because usually injection is commonly known for getting medicine directly into the blood vessels what usually is a positive thing.
The term „chemtrails“ puts the word right besides the topic it is dealing about.

Air Force staff usually are not „metadebunkers“. They want to protect their image. Politics are not what matters first for Air Force employee. The kind of work is what matters for the Flight staff.

For that reason it is obviously that Air Force staff can tell the public more about customs within the U.S. Air Force than „metadebunkers“ can do.

About the „Chemtrail Chemistry“-Manuals of the U.S. Air Force Academy from 1990 to 1992:
„TheBrain said:
'So I have one question...

It seems all you uber debunkers are focusing on the CONTENT of the document in question, which granted has no information relative to chemtrails...

BUT you are all overlooking the OBVIOUS The fact that the TERM "CHEMTRAILS" is on the front cover of "every first year cadet's" handbook.

So put aside your bias for a minute and explain WHY the Air Force Academy is making this term "CHEMTRAILS" front and center for all cadets to memorize.

Is it just a joke? Well it's still ongoing then because I get yearly updates on that manual and the term "CHEMTRAILS" is still there

Would love an explanation for the motivation of the Air Force in using this obviously controversial term

Thanks'


'Because in the Air Force, it is not a 'controversial' term. I retired from the Air Force in 2007. There are plays on words that involve anything aviation related throughout almost every facet of your life in the AF. For example, there are dining halls whose names makes use of 'trail' or 'trails' - i.e. 'Trails End' dining hall at Warren AFB. The base newspaper at McConnell Air Force Base in Kansas is literally called 'Contrails' (or it was when I was there). The term 'trailblazer' is often used in a multitude of ways to describe someone who has ascended in rank quickly or been the first to journey down a particular path, etc. etc.

I've seen dining halls and other base establishments make use of the names 'Final Approach', 'Check 6', 'Blue Yonder', etc.

The idea that the AF Academy chooses to call its chemistry program 'Chemtrails' is neither surprising or controversial, at least not to someone who actually spent some time in the AF.
ssfor27, Mar 19, 2013' “
http://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-1990-usaf-academy-chemtrails-manual.352/#post-32505


„ It seems all you uber debunkers are focusing on the CONTENT of the document in question, which granted has no information relative to chemtrails...“ (TheBrain)
If you look into the research policy of the U.S. Air Force of the Fifties you may find the missing information connected to „aerosol injection“ interacting with electronic manipulation of the injected aerosol released into the environment creating a plasma.


http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7547#Post7547

In the midst of the argument about the origin of the term of chemtrails is the fact, that the three manuals „Chemtrails Chemistry“ of the years 1990 – 1992 are the origin of that term meanwhile „metadebunker“ don't want to see. A connection between these manuals and the year 1998 is not that far off as „metadebunkers“ see it. The term of „chemtrails“ came up in connection with the introduction of engineered modification of the atmosphere. There has to be seen not only the U.S. Air Force development as an institution for itself but also the context of political priorities within presidential periods which uses the institution „U.S. Air Force“ for its goals. And the congress hearings of the seventies showed that not only weather modification was the target of research policy by DoD, U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force but also climate modification which is denied to be used nowadays.

http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7386#Post7386

These are the reasons why it is necessary to move beyond „metadebunker“ arguments. It is useful to dive into the „culture“ of U.S. Air Force – at least a little bit.

First, there was cultural development. Afterwards there would come eventual cultural engineers like the „metadebunker“ to adapt culture to a level which is politically opportune – acceptable to the ruling interests in society.

In this context it matters how the term „Chemtrails“ got the meaning it has today.

A „Firefighter“ writes about the discussed „Chemtrails chemistry“-manuals:
„I will give a bit more info about it. Yes it is just freshman chemistry for the USAFA cadets. Why is it called 'Chemtrails'?

Because every first year cadet has a small book to memorize aviation and USAF history and trivia from, called 'Contrails'. Chemtrails, was just a play on that.
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/for...ollection-of-air-force-academy-insignia/ “

http://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-1990-usaf-academy-chemtrails-manual.352/#post-3154



And Jay Reinolds has the opinion:

„(...)
Reality: The book is a lab manual for freshmen at the academy who take chemistry course # 131 as an ordinary part of graduation.
'100' level courses are for freshmen students.
The lab manual contains nothing of relevance to the subject of aerial spraying, and the name is simply a play on the words contrails and chemistry.
This was found out by chemtrail believer Diane Harvey in 2001, but continues to be bandied about as part of chemtrails lore.
(...)“
http://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-1990-usaf-academy-chemtrails-manual.352/

Diane Harvey: http://rense.com/general19/dis.htm


Mike West (Metadebunk) thinks that the term of „chemtrails“ was already used in 1998 – describing engineered modification of the atmosphere.
„It's from 1990. The term 'chemtrails' was not invented in the "chemical trails from planes" sense until around 1998. So this is just a play on words 'Chemistry' + 'Contrails' (as it's the Air Force) = 'chemtrails'.
Mick West, Mar 18, 2013“
http://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-1990-usaf-academy-chemtrails-manual.352/#post-32457

While metadebunkers are concentrated of handling the interpretation of the words of „contrail“ or „chemtrail“ pilots or flightrelated employees are more concentrated to the cultural „atmosphere“ within the pilot and aircraft scene. They describe more everyday behaviour than being destructive to the meaning of „chemtrails“. That makes them valueful because then it is possible to analyze the original meaning of „chemtrails“ within the USAFA.

Thanks to ssfor27 (look above) one may imagine that pilots are joking around to repress the dangerous parts of their job and everyday life. It is realistic that the term of „Trail“ is quite a bit around in groups related to aircraft industry – especially amongst pilots. Also, they have a different attitude to poison than most of the rest of the populace. They are breathing it everyday. Some even mean they have gasoline in their blood as an expression to be part of the air industry. Also, pilots are still special despite of mass transportation in the sky. For that reason they have partly their own language. And „Trail“ is obviously part of that language.

As it is usual Freshmen in the U.S. don't have it easy and have to be patient to get professional recognition.Freshmen are new and if the word „Trail“ has such a special meaning within the U.S. Air Force it is natural to confrontate the new ones with U.S. Air Force tradition which relates to the term of „Trail“.

Nevertheless, what the metadebunkers are skipping in their argument is the fact that the U.S. Air Force does not only have a certain culture within its own organisation with a specific language usage but also a history of military achievements which permits the association with other kinds of meaning of the term of „chemtrails“ than the one of the freshman connection at USAFA.

And if one looks into the history the ions described within the „Chemtrails Chemistry“-Manual associates easily with results described in Congress hearings. Already in the fifties U.S. Air Force was experimenting with particle beamers used to influence the weather. And when George Bush sr. proclaimed the coming of a „New World Order“ in U.S. Congress on September 11, 1991 and the Neocons under George W. Bush came up again with these allmighty ambitions in the year 2001 one may look at events in the sky distinctively different than at events in earlier times – especially when meanwhile declassified information shows that it is not too far away to think that government is not doing always good to its own populace.

The essence of the strategy of the „metadebunkers“ is that the ignorance of the main motive of the „Chemtrail believers“ - the anxiety to be poisoned – may develop the perspective that the topic „Chemtrails“ is quieting down itself. The motives of the „metadebunkers“ is everything else than clear. It seems that „metadebunkers“ are avoiding to discuss the content of the chemtrail theory. "Chemtrail Theory" is just a metapher for the association to stop thinking. The accusations made by the chemtrail theory are severe. It could be easily to devalue them by facts if there were facts which argue against the truth of the chemtrail theory. The chemtrail theory has left the stadium of hypothesis. In itself it has a logical construction. Like every theory else it could be disproven by facts which disrupts the theoretical building. Many of the Chemtrail Theorists were expecting that the government would publish data understandible for the general public which would disprove the allegations made by the Chemtrail Theorists. Unfortunately, there came nothing although it would be easy for governments to measure the content in the air of materials like aluminum, barium or strontium even at a nano scale and publish them. But in contrary, the dealing of the Fukushima catastrophe and meanwhile published historic events like the testing of humans on nuclear test sites indicate that governments in general and in the case of Fukushima the Japanese Government especially don't like to tell the truth when situations are difficult.

This is what really makes you paying attention: the administrative and power advantage of the government structure is not used to devalue the allegations of the Chemtrail Theorists. Why?


USAF Enviromental Specialist Kristen Meghan | Blows Whistle On Air Force


And with respect to this perspective the Freshman course „Chemtrail Chemistry“ gives a new possible answer to the question of why the course was called „Chemtrail Chemistry“ (during the Presidential administration period of George Bush sr.) and not „Contrail Chemistry“: The earlier you get used to a term in life the earlier you learn that this kind of stuff is „normal“. This playing-around with terms may have a deeper meaning as pedagogs always try to cultivate the brains being presented in their work. In that way they are always selling the ruling culture they get paid from.