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.
originally posted by: ConnectDots
originally posted by: NewzNose
And do you dispute the scientist on the phonecall used the word chemtrail?
The scientist, Douglas E. Rowland of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, definitely did use the term "chemtrails" as well as "chemical trails." He said, "There are different kinds of chemtrails that we use, as you probably know; different trails at night we use; different trails during the day."
There is also an Air Force Academy Chemistry Manual 202 page .pdf entitled "Chemtrails" that has been discussed on another thread.
One can see why the public would be confused about the term "chemtrails."
originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
What needs to be done? Work? Family? Because I don't sit on ATS all day. I save my chemtrail research for mornings. Nothing like an ill-mannered post to get my day started.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Bunkrbuster
They're using lithium to study winds at the edge of space. It's a lot different. You can put any kind of tracer in the lower atmosphere and it will work, including instruments on weather balloons. Up at the ionosphere you need something visually reactive that can be seen from the ground through telescopes.
originally posted by: Bunkrbuster
then how do they produce all these satellite imagery of Co2 and all other aerosols and anything other than precipitation and heat signatures?
They would have to technically be using some sort of reflective type chemical alumina or something of that nature right?
originally posted by: beenharmed
a reply to: NewzNose
Since when does the secret organizations advise the public....unless it belongs to disinformation itself.
If lithium is by scientific evidence in the atmosphere, then obviously it was not put there on purpose....since when does a scientist believe himself to be a moron?
Remembering that scientists do not like to be considered anything less than super intelligent.
Excellent approach one thing that is definitely true the same scientist that wants to be thought of as nothing but a genius will never admit if he Fubars a project then will he? Nope that prolly a good reason NASA comes out and says crap like there's a new earth like planet just on the other side of the sun and then give some drenched out excuse.
Hence this advice makes no sense, for no sensible human would commit such an act on purpose.
If the lithium is evident in the atmosphere then their nuclear science put it there by cause and effect, which would be the true reasoning to this public statement.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Bunkrbuster
No. Satellites use visible, infrared, or microwave signals to detect winds and weather, or aerosols.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: Bunkrbuster
then how do they produce all these satellite imagery of Co2 and all other aerosols and anything other than precipitation and heat signatures?
modis.gsfc.nasa.gov...
They would have to technically be using some sort of reflective type chemical alumina or something of that nature right?
No....
modis.gsfc.nasa.gov...
originally posted by: Bunkrbuster
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: Bunkrbuster
then how do they produce all these satellite imagery of Co2 and all other aerosols and anything other than precipitation and heat signatures?
modis.gsfc.nasa.gov...
They would have to technically be using some sort of reflective type chemical alumina or something of that nature right?
No....
modis.gsfc.nasa.gov...
Oh ok according to Zaphod58 he saying you do so little confused here who's the expert and who's blowing smoke?
If you look I have a thread started it talks all about that satellite system and the other programs.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: Bunkrbuster
then how do they produce all these satellite imagery of Co2 and all other aerosols and anything other than precipitation and heat signatures?
modis.gsfc.nasa.gov...
They would have to technically be using some sort of reflective type chemical alumina or something of that nature right?
No....
modis.gsfc.nasa.gov...
originally posted by: beenharmed
a reply to: Bunkrbuster
I will drench my horses this weekend, thanks for the advice.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Bunkrbuster
Because, again, you're talking about lower atmosphere winds measured from above, and extreme upper atmosphere winds, being measured from the ground. They're measured completely differently. To see what the winds are doing from the ground in the region being talked about, you need a way to see them. That means you need a tracer, such as lithium.
originally posted by: Bunkrbuster
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Bunkrbuster
Because, again, you're talking about lower atmosphere winds measured from above, and extreme upper atmosphere winds, being measured from the ground. They're measured completely differently. To see what the winds are doing from the ground in the region being talked about, you need a way to see them. That means you need a tracer, such as lithium.
Oh ok so how does Doppler radar pick up the cloud formations or are you talking lower that that?
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Bunkrbuster
They're looking much higher than doppler radar can see. There isn't a radar in use that can see the winds in the ionosphere.