An explanation of those white lines in the sky behind planes.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: InTheLight

What do you mean? I was just offering you some background. There will not be a test later.

Finding a solidified theroy, what the heck is that? Is any theory solidified?

a reply to: InTheLight

Sorry. Don't worry about it. It's not really important since they are just likely contrails.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: InTheLight

Sorry. Don't worry about it. It's not really important since they are just likely contrails.

Whatever contrails are?

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: InTheLight

Sorry. Don't worry about it. It's not really important since they are just likely contrails.

Whatever contrails are?

Back to square one.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: InTheLight

Sorry. Don't worry about it. It's not really important since they are just likely contrails.

Whatever contrails are?

Back to square one.

On to real science.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: ConnectDots

The problem is, your knowledge of the shadow government that "may" exist, doesn't change the laws of physics. the same laws that explain how things work. Until you can show me how any other chemical than water can be sprayed and spread out into a cloud like substance, I am afraid all the whistlblowing is just hot air. (pun intended)

I dont know what chemtrails are made of. But. There are certainly chemicals that cause moisture to gather at altitude. Cloud seeding is used around the world on a regular basis. No secret.

a reply to: jbowenh

Cloud seeding is used around the world on a regular basis.

Yes. And it doesn't make clouds. The idea is to try to make existing clouds produce rain.

Whether or not it works depends on who you ask. Those that you would pay to do it will tell you that it definitely does. Meteorologists are not quite so definitive.

It's also not all that apparent that it's going on if you're watching from the ground.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: jbowenh

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: jbowenh

originally posted by: network dude
This debate seems to be a difficult one to have. One side is based on science fact, the other, seems to either disregard the facts, or flat out doesn't believe them. In an effort to find out which of the two that is, I'd like to ask that anyone who disagrees with this science, offer an alternative explanation to what makes contrails persist. Keep in mind that all the science offered here is what has been taught to everyone in the field for decades.
Here is a start:
www.wrh.noaa.gov...

What is a contrail and how does it form?


To answer this question, lets first identify what a contrail is. A contrail is the condensation trail that is left behind by a passing jet plane. Contrails form when hot humid air from jet exhaust mixes with environmental air of low vapor pressure and low temperature. Vapor pressure is just a fancy term for the amount of pressure that is exerted by water vapor itself (as opposed to atmospheric, or barometric, pressure which is due to the weight of the entire atmosphere above you). The mixing occurs directly behind the plane due to the turbulence generated by the engine. If condensation (conversion from a gas to a liquid) occurs, then a contrail becomes visible. Since air temperatures at these high atmospheric levels are very cold (generally colder than -40 F), only a small amount of liquid is necessary for condensation to occur. Water is a normal byproduct of combustion in engines.

Here is a page with some very specific information:
cimss.ssec.wisc.edu...

So again, if you believe in the chemtrail theory, that's fine. As long as you understand it's just a theory. But if the above cannot be dis proven, then the age old "just look up" "I can see them with my own eyes" is proof of nothing but reaffirming the fact that contrails exist.
Contrails:

(BTW-that thing sticking up is a driver, this pic was taken on the #1 hole a golf course.)

i believe you have misunderstood the entire debate based on the basic information you have presented. The arguement is not based on the factual existence of contrails. It is the difference between seeing a jet fly over head at decent altitude making a trail and having a crop duster fly over you all day long spraying large amounts of _______ at illegally low altitudes. I argue with you because my brother comes at me with your very same argument. Contrails are not chemtrails.

I've been in this debate for about 8 years now. The chemtrail side claims that any trail lasting for more than "X" number of minutes is a chemtrail, because contrails can't persist. THAT is the conspiracy theory that I am trying to explain against. The pointing to a contrail in a picture and claiming that it's a chemtrail.

If you are discussing low altitude spraying, then you aren't in the chemtrail debate, you are being sprayed with something. Get a decent camera and find out what is happening.

And please, by all means, help explain this to others. Being afraid of clouds is sad, and people shouldn't be sad for such a silly reason.

Well said. I cant argue with that. People are very quick to call something a chemtrail when it is clearly a normal contrail. That does not negate the genuine chemtrails that do exist. Its not a predictable experience and i dont film my life. And this isnt directed at you but when people are rude in their responses it shows an emotional connection to the issue which further illustrates the needs of the ego. Its stops being about truth.

Thanks for the post. I agree that rudeness is a deterrent to a good conversation. While it's easy to be nice, at times, when provoked, it's easy to slip into asshat mode.

Could you explain how you might recognize a genuine chemtrail?

Yes sir. In my personal experience its altitude and regularity or apparent density of trail. If its cold outside even that "identifier" of a chemtrail goes out the window.

If its very low ( under a few thousand feet) creating thick yet discontinuous lines as if the spray is being flipped on or off.

Screw it. Ill tell you exactly what i saw. You probably will not believe me. I genuinely will understand.

I was cutting grass at work in sw virginia i noticed two large jets at extremely low altitude performing a refueling air to air whilst doing a U-turn. There was a huge billow of white cloud like material beginning at the first point of the u turn. Once i had seen them they were around halfway done with u turn. As they exited the u turn....they vanished. In front of my face. The spray quit as well. It was middle of day blue sky. I swear on my life its true. When i say they were low it was hardly five hundred feet.

I understand nobody believing me. I didnt and i wouldnt if it didnt happen to me. Its just too weird. They honestly train in the sky here pretty often and they get really low as well but what i saw that day defied all reasonable explanation. It made me realize something very very big really is going on. I have no clue what that may be.

a reply to: jbowenh

I was cutting grass at work in sw virginia i noticed two large jets at extremely low altitude performing a refueling air to air whilst doing a U-turn.

At 500 feet? Doubtful.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jbowenh

I was cutting grass at work in sw virginia i noticed two large jets at extremely low altitude performing a refueling air to air whilst doing a U-turn.

At 500 feet? Doubtful.

THATS the part of the story that strikes you as unbelievable? They fly at that height regularly here when training. They fly within the valleys of the mountains. So.

a reply to: jbowenh

They fly at that height regularly here when training. They fly within the valleys of the mountains.

Yes, I know. But they do not refuel when doing so.

I was cutting grass at work in sw virginia i noticed two large jets at extremely low altitude performing a refueling air to air whilst doing a U-turn.

Not typically i wouldnt imagine. Especially when both craft are identical in size. Typically dont do any of the things in my story. I would suggest it isnt in fact very normal at all. Atypical. Odd. Alarming. Unusual. Strange.

a reply to: jbowenh
When refuelling aircraft disengage there is always a bloom of spilled fuel in the moments between withdrawal of the probe and the valve closing on the boom or drogue. I've also seen quite long streams of spilled fuel when an incorrect connection is made. Could you have seen that?

I too find an estimate of 500ft for this activity the most unbelievable part.

a reply to: jbowenh


notice at 3:45 when they disconnect, there is a little spilled fuel. Is that what you were seeing?

And I don't know the lowest altitude they refuel at, but I think it's up there a bit.

In order to have contrail looking lines at low altitude, you would have a fuel dump.
www.nj.com...


Is that what you saw?

a reply to: network dude

And I don't know the lowest altitude they refuel at, but I think it's up there a bit.

Well according to boomer135 it's about 6000 ft. so 500 ft would be just a tad low.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And if anyone would know that would be the person.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: InTheLight

Sorry. Don't worry about it. It's not really important since they are just likely contrails.

Whatever contrails are?

Back to square one.

On to real science.

I keep running into walls where scientists state that they are unable to find information and/or unable to accurately measure the chemical reactivity and interaction within or in the formation of contrails. So, I am back sitting on the fence here.

The presence of liquid coatings may alter the chemical reactivity of dry exhaust soot, which is poorly known (Chapter 2). Soot particles acting as freezing nuclei have the potential to alter cirrus cloud properties (see Section 3.4). Present observations do not rule out the possibility that aircraft soot particles can act as freezing nuclei in cirrus formation, perhaps even without a H2SO4/H2O coating. Information is lacking on how the chemical reactivity and freezing properties of soot might change in aging plumes from interactions with background gases and particles or as a result of aerosol processing in contrails.

www.ipcc.ch...

a reply to: InTheLight
From your source

Contrails consist of ice particles that mainly nucleate on exhaust soot and volatile plume aerosol particles. Contrail formation is caused by the increase in relative humidity (RH) that occurs in the engine plume as a result of mixing of warm and moist exhaust gases with colder and less humid ambient air (Schmidt, 1941; Appleman, 1953).

What exactly are you trying to not understand about that?

originally posted by: waynos
a reply to: jbowenh
When refuelling aircraft disengage there is always a bloom of spilled fuel in the moments between withdrawal of the probe and the valve closing on the boom or drogue. I've also seen quite long streams of spilled fuel when an incorrect connection is made. Could you have seen that?

I too find an estimate of 500ft for this activity the most unbelievable part.

Thanks for a genuinely intelligent rebuttle. It was directly over the road certainly under a thousand feet. It did not APPEAR to be fuel based on how it hung in the air. Apparently not dissipating for hours and hours. Do i know how long fuel would stay in the air? No i do not. From what i have read flying under five thousand feet is illegal over populated areas. Judging by how often it occurs here im assuming they dont count my area as populated.

I totally understand the scepticism. And your suggestions are pretty valid. Thats the ONLY refueling ive ever seen in person. And the only time ive seen jets disappear. Vanish.

a reply to: network dude


Also i just did a bit of reading on LAAR. LOW ALTITUDE AERIAL REFUELING.

a reply to: jbowenh

If it hung in the air it was not a fuel spillage. If it was you'd have seen it fall and then vanish into nothing in under a minute (being generous even at that).

I don't know what you saw. The possibilities are that you seriously underestimated the height of a contrail (not being condescending, it is possible due to the vast size a contrail can be, making it look far lower then it really is) or you did see something different and which doesn't conform to contrails (unless it was below minus 20 degrees and very humid at 1000ft when you saw it).

As a one off I don't think either of us can be more specific than that. If it reoccurs pictures and either FR24 data, or a time date and location within two weeks of the event (when FR24 data is deleted) would be useful.