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.

 

Chemtrail debunkers may have lost the plot.

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Observationalist

Speaking as one who has been quite snippy lately and regrets it.

I totally disagree that this is a question of whether one trusts the government or not. I think it comes down to knowledge and understanding of the subjects of weather and aviation.

Personally I have fought, and will continue to fight in my own small way, against the despicable swines that govern us and are destroying my country for their own short term self interests. I have no doubt whatsoever that if "chemtrails" could be used to get these parasites what they want they would do it like a shot.

However I am also firmly convinced that chemtrail theory is utter nonsense and that is because I know enough about the science and practicalities of aviation that it *cannot* work in the way it is pushed on all these agenda driven websites. I know enough about weather to know that "contrails don't persist" is so dumb that nobody over the ages of 5 should be fooled by it. But they are.

I would love to engage in polite conversation with a believer where we can deconstruct their and my positions honestly, point by point, and see what stands up to scrutiny and what does not, but a believer will never let this happen. I've lost count of the number of times I've tried, only to be dismissed as a government shill, which is beyond ironic, or a straight refusal to engage. It's been as if the possibility of them being wrong terrifies them and that is not a good position to be coming from, on ANY subject.
edit on 12-6-2016 by waynos because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 12 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude
Well dude, you got all the club members in this thread


Strange you should post this now as just yesterday I watched one of those "In depth look at the chemtrail theory" programs that was on the box.
Two things in the progy caught my attention.

1. "The conspiracy that they are spraying chemicals into the atmosphere"
What do you make of that sentence?

2. "Mr scientist, is it true that this is happening?" - "Of course not, though we do spray chemicals into the atmosphere for research purposes"

Those chems are having an effect...or is it affect? see I told you it was happening!

edit on 12-6-2016 by VoidHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude

Oh Jubila and Jubilo, I am more guilty than you both. I have been a "debunker" of chemtrails for a while now.


I have been waiting years for someone to get a Masonic reference into a Chemtrail thread.


Me too. Glad it wasn't wasted.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Chemtrail debunkers are a welcome necessity to me, as are all other opposition to highly questionable conspiracy theories using critical thinking and well carried out studies.

Let's face it, planes are burning toxic fuels and I for one don't believe the contrails are devoid of chemicals. So, as we may continue to debunk a government depopulation agenda, I certainly welcome the debunking of toxic chemicals in con(chem)trails.

Please help me get off the fence either way.




The burning of incredible quantities of toxic fuel has impacts that extend beyond the climate. As soon as airplanes leave the gate, they begin to produce phenomenal amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and cancer-causing toxics such as benzene and formaldehyde. 3 This pollution travels miles downwind, contributing to asthma, lung and heart disease, and a large number of cancers. The emissions from taxiing and take-off of aircraft help make airports some of the largest sources of these pollutants and major public health hazards. For example, Los Angeles Airport is the largest source of NOx, a key cause of the region’s copious smog, in California and the third largest source of carbon monoxide. 4 Logan Airport in Boston, MA produces twice as much benzene as the next largest source in Massachusetts. 5 Scientists have found that even small increases in taxi time at airports in Southern California contribute to significant increases in asthma, respiratory ailments, and heart disease in surrounding communities. 6 Scientists also believe that particulate matter emissions from airplanes, along with ships and trains, contribute to 1,800 early deaths per year in the United Kingdom alone. 7 These health impacts also translate into large economic costs for society.


www.flyingclean.com...



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

I can sort of do that for you. Pollution is a problem Anything that burns fuel for propulsion makes pollution. But, in the context of "contrails", the part you see isn't the pollution at all, unless you are discussing visual pollution. The bad stuff is invisible and happening the entire time the engines are running. I realize that doesn't make any of that more palatable, but it might make you less concerned about the white lines you see in the sky. They are man made cirrus clouds, and just as harmless.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: InTheLight

I can sort of do that for you. Pollution is a problem Anything that burns fuel for propulsion makes pollution. But, in the context of "contrails", the part you see isn't the pollution at all, unless you are discussing visual pollution. The bad stuff is invisible and happening the entire time the engines are running. I realize that doesn't make any of that more palatable, but it might make you less concerned about the white lines you see in the sky. They are man made cirrus clouds, and just as harmless.


Yeah, you keep repeating the same theory but it doesn't jive with me, perhaps only because I am looking at the bigger picture, that being, accumulated quantities of pollutants in the atmosphere from pollutants within contrails. As well, with the information I am looking at, and posting, a serious pollution problem exists from plane exhaust. Now how can that be if contrails are just harmless cirrus clouds?




Alarmingly, aircraft emissions are expected to more than triple by mid-century. But the Center is working to make sure that prediction doesn’t come true: In December 2007 we joined with states, regional governments and other conservation groups to petition the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to address the effects of aircraft pollution under the Clean Air Act. The agency continued to drag its feet on the issue, so in June 2010 the Center and allies sued the agency for its failure to address global warming pollution from aircraft, ships and nonroad vehicles. The next year a court ruled that the EPA must formally determine whether greenhouse gas pollution from aircraft endangers human health and welfare. When the agency still hadn't done so nearly three years later, in August 2014 the Center and allies filed a notice of intent to sue it over its failure to reduce global warming pollution from aircraft engines. The next month the EPA announced the beginning of a domestic rulemaking process to determine whether the fast-growing carbon emissions from American aircraft endanger public health and welfare. In June 2015 the EPA finally released a draft finding that greenhouse gas pollution from America’s aircraft fleet does harm the climate and endanger human health and welfare. But the agency also considered handing off responsibility for airplane emissions to a secretive international aviation organization that, for the past 18 years, has refused to curb aircraft-induced global warming. That agency is now debating setting aviation CO2 emissions standards in 2016, but the standards under consideration are woefully insufficient. By as late as 2030, they would likely affect just 5 percent of aircraft — and even then would do next to nothing to lower the industry’s steeply rising emission curve.


www.biologicaldiversity.org...



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

I guess the big issue is reading comprehension. I don't mean that rudely, I mean that literally. If you go back and re-read your article, then put that with "Yeah, you keep repeating the same theory", you may find some similarities. Like aircraft flights are ever increasing, so you will only see more of this.

I am just some faceless internet account. You don't have to believe me or even acknowledge me. But if this interests you, I strongly suggest you find a person whom you do trust and who is in a position of knowledge. Aeronautical engineer, a meteorologist, You High School science teacher, someone. I keep repeating the same thing becasue it's the truth. It's factual and verifiable. I apologize if it isn't what you wish to hear.
science-edu.larc.nasa.gov...

If you feel that something I have said is incorrect, I ask in the nicest possible way that you explain why it's wrong, and offer something tangible to back up your claim.


ETA:
If you are truly an eco warrior, type this into the google and see what you get. "what is the biggest cause of pollution in the US"
Hint: it's not anything to do with planes. link
edit on 13-6-2016 by network dude because: clarified idea.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight



Yeah, you keep repeating the same theory but it doesn't jive with me, perhaps only because I am looking at the bigger picture, that being, accumulated quantities of pollutants in the atmosphere from pollutants within contrails. As well, with the information I am looking at, and posting, a serious pollution problem exists from plane exhaust. Now how can that be if contrails are just harmless cirrus clouds?


That may be because you may think you're looking at the bigger picture but you're actually not?

By fixating on contrails you are missing the bigger picture which is that ALL forms of combustion from cars, factories, power plants et al put these pollutants into the air. This is at face level too, not 7 miles high, but even then aircraft engines are putting out these pollutants when they are taxying, taking off, climbing, cruising, descending, landing and taxying back. It is ONLY in the cruise phase that contrails are also produced and these often disappear quickly anyway. So, in summary, the amount of additional pollution a plane leaves when it is creating a contrail is NIL compared to all other times itis under power.

That's a bigger picture for you.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: waynos

I would go a bit farther and say that the contrail is still not pollution at all. The closest it comes is that it needs aerosols to nucleate and a portion of those aerosols may come from the exhaust process, but some are already there from other sources. So the visible cloud part is a non event when discussion pollution except visual. Cirrus clouds need those same aerosols to nucleate and become clouds, so the statement that contrails are no more dangerous than cirrus clouds seems like a factual one.

Hope all is well with ya'll across the pond.



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Perhaps I just have the belief that exhaust particulates have not yet been studied in-depth due to lack of government funding and what has been studied so far was conducted with questionable measuring apparatus.




How are aircraft emissions linked to contrail formation?

Aircraft engines emit water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), small amounts of nitrogen oxides (NO), hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur gases, and soot and metal particles formed by the high-temperature combustion of jet fuel during flight. Of these emittants, only water vapor is necessary for contrail formation. Sulfur gases are also of potential interest because they lead to the formation of small particles. Particles suitable for water droplet formation are necessary for contrail formation. Initial contrail particles, however, can either be already present in the atmosphere or formed in the exhaust gas. All other engine emissions are considered nonessential to contrail formation.


www.earthlyissues.com...



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

Looking into aerosols taught me a good bit about the micro particles that float around up there.
www.nasa.gov...


Three types of aerosols significantly affect the Earth's climate. The first is the volcanic aerosol layer which forms in the stratosphere after major volcanic eruptions like Mt. Pinatubo. The dominant aerosol layer is actually formed by sulfur dioxide gas which is converted to droplets of sulfuric acid in the stratosphere over the course of a week to several months after the eruption (Fig. 1). Winds in the stratosphere spread the aerosols until they practically cover the globe.



The second type of aerosol that may have a significant effect on climate is desert dust. Pictures from weather satellites often reveal dust veils streaming out over the Atlantic Ocean from the deserts of North Africa.



The third type of aerosol comes from human activities. While a large fraction of human-made aerosols come in the form of smoke from burning tropical forests, the major component comes in the form of sulfate aerosols created by the burning of coal and oil. The concentration of human-made sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere has grown rapidly since the start of the industrial revolution. At current production levels, human-made sulfate aerosols are thought to outweigh the naturally produced sulfate aerosols. The concentration of aerosols is highest in the northern hemisphere where industrial activity is centered. The sulfate aerosols absorb no sunlight but they reflect it, thereby reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface. Sulfate aerosols are believed to survive in the atmosphere for about 3-5 days.


Being aware is great, I wish everyone was. But understanding what's there, and what constitutes pollution is hugely important. You have to know what's bad, what's not all that bad, and what should be on the bottom of the pile. Then being willing and able to act on that information becomes the big issue. (IMHO)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I was going to add to my post that air transport is also the only source of exhaust pollution that mitigates the amount it puts out by using clean, uncombusted air taken through the front fan of a hbpr engine to produce power. I'm unaware of any equivalent arrangement on other forms of transport or in industry (wind farms excepted)?

Yeah, all is fine here thanks. Got my new "chemtrail installation and servicing" T-shirt this week, so looking forward to going out wearing that, lol.

edit on 13-6-2016 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: waynos
Got my new "chemtrail installation and servicing" T-shirt this week, so looking forward to going out wearing that, lol.


I'd love to see a pic of that shirt.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude



teespring.com...=369&cid=6521&sid=back



edit on 14-6-2016 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: waynos

I want that shirt! that would be hilarious.

I would wear it often.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: GoShredAK

That was exactly my thinking. Someone may even try to "educate" me lol.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 06:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: waynos
a reply to: network dude



teespring.com...=369&cid=6521&sid=back




Fantastic! Please update us on your reaction in public.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
I give it 4 days tops before this tshirt is posted here or elsewhere as proof chemtrails exist



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 06:48 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Yeah, if it's not real, why would anyone make a t-shirt? Lol.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 07:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: waynos
a reply to: network dude



teespring.com...=369&cid=6521&sid=back




Hope you've got your patches too

teamchemtrail.com...



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join