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.
That is patently false.
How they used to look was very sporadic lines in nature, sometimes transparent which would disappear within an hour or two.
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: riley
It is never ever done on cloudy days.. or days where there is even a hint of cloud. That is something else I find strange.
I beg to differ. It usually HAPPENS on cloudy days. If you look at a number of photos of the phenomenon, where there's enough of the rest of the sky showing to give you a decent view, you'll generally see cirrus and either cirro-cumulus or alto-cumulus in the same photo.
That's because that cloud pattern is indicative of an atmospheric condition that's almost sure to generate persistent contrails.
originally posted by: riley
[
You DO know this is actually a conspiracy site yes? I am trying to discuss this subject. I find it strange that you would try shame people speculating on conspiracy theories in a place that is designed to do exactly that. If someone speaks about conspiracy theories that does not automatically mean they are ignoring credible scientific evidence.
Whom have I so accused?
You also seem to ignore many points which you have made a habit of.. and accusing people of being liars is one of those habits.
Whose memory?
I am going by memory of what contrails used to look like.
Who said contrails are invisible?
They were not always invisible as you earlier claimed.. if they were there would be no cause to even label them as we wouldn't even know of them.
originally posted by: riley
a reply to: Phage
Yes you are selectively posting. You also seem to ignore many points which you have made a habit of.. and accusing people of being liars is one of those habits.
I am going by memory of what contrails used to look like. They were not always invisible as you earlier claimed.. if they were there would be no cause to even label them as we wouldn't even know of them.
originally posted by: riley
originally posted by: payt69
..and yet again. I know what water vapor looks like.
Well it's invisible. Maybe it helps if you read this to help you understand things a bit better:
en.wikipedia.org...
Wow.. not only do you insult by ignoring me actually saying I know what water vapor looks like.. yet you quote from Wikipedia of all places who has a history of posting ignorant BS often to the point of posting blatant lies? All the while talking about denying ignorance?
If you are going to patronize and try educate people so they can think correctly like you do.. at least have the courtesy of using a source that is not full of ignorance and is at least even slightly scientifically credible.
Wikipedia can be edited by anyone with a bias. It is not scientifically credible and frankly being expected to accept it as such is insulting.
edit. No that is not a request for you to go googling finding something that is credible you've already shown where you get your science from..
originally posted by: waynos
originally posted by: riley
a reply to: Phage
Yes you are selectively posting. You also seem to ignore many points which you have made a habit of.. and accusing people of being liars is one of those habits.
I am going by memory of what contrails used to look like. They were not always invisible as you earlier claimed.. if they were there would be no cause to even label them as we wouldn't even know of them.
He never said contrails were invisible. He said Water vapour is invisible. If you're going to try and argue your point, you may need to make more effort to read the question properly.
Phage also posted several links to demonstrate that persistence and spreading of contrails has been occurring for almost a century, or are you older then that?
They didn't. They didn't fly high enough.
Frankly I am surprised that the Wright brother's planes created contrails but okay then.
You said that you know what water vapor looks like. Water vapor is invisible. Visible contrails (a contraction of condensation trails) are not composed of water vapor (because water vapor is invisible), they are composed of ice crystals. The point is quite relevant since it is an indication of what your level of understanding about what contrails actually are.
Arguing that they're invisible doesn't make much sense unless Phase just wants to argue an irrelevant point and/or troll.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: riley
They didn't. They didn't fly high enough.
Frankly I am surprised that the Wright brother's planes created contrails but okay then.
Who made that claim?
Precisely which is why the hundred years ago claim is ridiculous.
No. I asked you what water vapor looks like.
Me just saying I know what contrails are should have been enough.. yet you kept persisting insisting I didn't.
originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: riley
The Wright brothers flew in 1903.
A hundred years ago is 1916...the middle of world war 1
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: riley
Who made that claim?
Precisely which is why the hundred years ago claim is ridiculous.
No. I asked you what water vapor looks like.
Me just saying I know what contrails are should have been enough.. yet you kept persisting insisting I didn't.
You seem to have an affinity for strawman arguments.
Purpose On Thursday, November 5, 2009, the House Committee on Science & Technology will hold a hearing entitled ‘‘ Geoengineering: Assessing the Implications of Large-Scale Climate Intervention .’’
Geoengineering can be described as the delib- erate large-scale modification of the earth’s climate systems for the purposes of counteracting climate change. Geoengineering is a controversial issue because of the high degree of uncertainty over potential environmental, economic and societal im- pacts, and the assertion that research and deployment of geoengineering diverts at- tention and resources from efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The purpose of this hearing is to provide an introduction to the concept of geoengineering, includ- ing the science and engineering underlying various proposals, potential environ- mental risks and benefits, associated domestic and international governance issues, research and development needs, and economic rationales both supporting and op- posing the research and deployment of geoengineering activities.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: syrinx high priest
A patent filling doesn't mean anything. There are patent filings for just about anything you can name, some that would make you laugh until you cry. All that means is someone has an idea and way to make it work.