It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What sources would you believe for contrail science?

page: 5
9
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: menneni
Hello guys,

just posting couple of shots i took while i had the "trail-frenzy" going on highest levels.

Enjoy.



just pure awesomeness ^^ (IS IT NOT?!?)



That is one beautiful photo you have there. A 747 I believe from what I can see of it.




posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: br0ker
In reply to the OP. I don't see the point of your post. Both the government AND military personel has admitted spraying. China even admitted using one type to create clear skies during the Olympics. So what do you want to give people proof of that hasn't already been proven?


You're talking about cloud seeding, which is a decades-old technology (has been openly done since the 1950s) that uses small planes at low altitudes. Cloud seeding is what farmers do in times of drier weather in order to (hopefully) coax rain out of pre-existing moisture-laden low altitude clouds. I can see military applications as well.

However, this is NOT what people mean when they say "chemtrails" or contrails. Contrails (what some people call chemtrails) are made at high altitude, are are created due to the effect the hot wet exhaust of a jet engine can have on the surrounding atmosphere under certain conditions.

Cloud seeding is not the thing discussed in the contrails/chemtrail debate.



No, I am also talking about hazardous chemicals sprayed by the air force.
Remember that one army chick that came forth? Well, it didn't stop there.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: br0ker
That "army chick that came forward" was talking about hazardous materials that were used on military bases that were not properly documented - she was concerned with the health and safety of base personnel.

You can read an extensive discussion in which she talks about this here

Her whistle-blowing was to do with handling (or not!) of such substances on airforce bases.

She apparently does believe in chemtrails - however she says herself the whistleblowing is irrelevant to the chemtrail issue- a different matter entirely.


My whistleblowing is not related to chemtrails, it is related to industrial ground activities that overexposed the workers and they didn't want it reported, and since I took the samples, they wanted to demonize me in case I spoke out.

It is going through what I did as a whistleblower than led to my activism. Chemtrails and the TSA are my biggest topics I am linked to.


edit on 22-7-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: Add quote



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: br0ker

"That army chick", Kirsten Meghan, explained her position quite openly and stated that her whistleblowing was not about spraying at all.

If you're talking about something other than the things I mentioned in my reply to you, could you explain further?



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 04:42 AM
link   
a reply to: waynos

Thanks!

Yeah, i believe it's one of KLM's. Heres better view of same photobatch:



Could somebody tell me how/what this is about:


My neighbor is a aviation engineer, teaching the stuff. I asked about those kind of contrails from him, i suggested that maybe those are some sort of economical flightmodes, sort of. He did not know anything about if that kind of motors existed.

I find those fancy! Like a choo-choo-train! Seems like pulse-motor, hence the economical flight-idea.

...and this last one, i could not resist





posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: seabhac-rua
Let me remind you that chemtrail conspiracy theorists only recently(the last 5/6 yrs) adopted the 'geo-engineering' angle.

Absolutely not true. I personally "adopted" that angle from day 1...which happened in about 1992. Perhaps 5-6 years ago is when it entered your consciousness?

Here ya go....



originally posted by: seabhac-rua
From my experience the majority of people who invest their lives in a lot of this stuff are typically unstable individuals, to varying degrees.

Then your experience might be limited (or perhaps biased).


originally posted by: seabhac-rua
Some of these people are nice and peaceful, some are vulnerable and distressed, and some are f**king nut-cases who, if they could, would actually shoot down a jet they thought was 'spraying'.

So...pretty much any kind of people, across the entire spectrum?
edit on 7/29/2014 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Two links?

The first is a timeline made after the fact and the other is about Fluoranthene used in naval exercises.

You may have connected geo-engineering with chemtrails, but you are amongst a small few.

Like the chemtrailers believe that there were never trails before the 90's, I don't recall ever seeing geo-engineering being mentioned with chemtrails back when I was young and stupid thinking chemtrails were a thing, both are anecdotal, but fortunately contrails can be proven to exist well before the 90's, whereas linking chemtrails and geo engineering, as shown by your "proof" cannot.

Happy to be proven wrong though!


edit on 29-7-2014 by AlphaHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: menneni
a reply to: waynos


Could somebody tell me how/what this is about:


My neighbor is a aviation engineer, teaching the stuff. I asked about those kind of contrails from him, i suggested that maybe those are some sort of economical flightmodes, sort of. He did not know anything about if that kind of motors existed.

I find those fancy! Like a choo-choo-train! Seems like pulse-motor, hence the economical flight-idea.

Look up "Crow instability".

The contrails don't start off like that, of course. If you watch, they start out normal and then fragment and distort due to turbulence from the wingtip vortices.

Here: en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 06:06 AM
link   
a reply to: menneni

I concur with robs answer, I too, coincidentally, photographed a KLM 747 (flying over Worksop) and the trails swirled and broke up exactly like the ones in your photos.

I used the sequence in a thread elsewhere to disprove someone's claim that such trails were caused by Pulse a Detonation Wave engines and were thus proof of Aurora



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Rob48

OK, thanks for clearing that up for me. Apparently i've been just too lazy to ever look for explanation of those.


Aviation is fascinating!




posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you believe the stuff in your link, then I have a way to at least prove to you, that contrails are just that.
Are you willing to test my theory, or are you afraid it might damage your ego?



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: menneni




OK, thanks for clearing that up for me. Apparently i've been just too lazy to ever look for explanation of those.

Aviation is fascinating!


Here is a good place that explains about the many different types of contrails you could see...good resource for information.

contrailscience.com...



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you believe the stuff in your link, then I have a way to at least prove to you, that contrails are just that.
Are you willing to test my theory, or are you afraid it might damage your ego?

I have no ego.

I also don't need to see your stuff for the 1000th time, but thanks.



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Two links?

The first is a timeline made after the fact and the other is about Fluoranthene used in naval exercises.

You may have connected geo-engineering with chemtrails, but you are amongst a small few.

Like the chemtrailers believe that there were never trails before the 90's, I don't recall ever seeing geo-engineering being mentioned with chemtrails back when I was young and stupid thinking chemtrails were a thing, both are anecdotal, but fortunately contrails can be proven to exist well before the 90's, whereas linking chemtrails and geo engineering, as shown by your "proof" cannot.

Happy to be proven wrong though!



You apparently missed the POINT in my post.

I was addressing geoengineering and the fact that it was linked to con/chem trailage for far longer than the person I was addressing opined.

And there are far more than a few.




posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you believe the stuff in your link, then I have a way to at least prove to you, that contrails are just that.
Are you willing to test my theory, or are you afraid it might damage your ego?

I have no ego.

I also don't need to see your stuff for the 1000th time, but thanks.


Wow, so you know EVERYTHING there is to know. I wish I was that smart.
You are a fantastic representation of the chemtrail crowd. Keep up the good work.



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Uhhh, where's the evidence then?

If your point was to show a chemtrail and geo engineering link from the 90's, then you haven't made it.




top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join