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.

 

Awesome chemtrail/contrail pics from plane!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   
joepits says:

"your ignorance is amazing. did you catch my post in the other thread btw?

No I didn't; and if you start off your posts like that, don't expect me to, either.

Here's a suggestion, though: rather than waste everyone's time with personal attacks, why don't you show some evidence for these "chem-trails" of yours?




posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Anok says:

"Off the Street....I know I've said this over and over again but what else can I do.....I witnessed SOMETHING that was NOT normal aircraft traffic that looked suspiciously like the chem-spraying that ppl are talking about. And until someone can come up with another explanation of what I saw, which you haven't yet, then I will go with chem-spraying."

I think most of the other people have accepted the basic meteorology and physics as being a good explanation; that's why most people agree that the whole "chem-trail" thing has been pretty well debunked.

It sounds like you're saying, in effect, that you saw something you didn't understand, so you ascribed it to "chem-trails". Hey, this is a free country; if you want to believe in "chem-trails" rather than do the research, it's certainly your privilege to do so.

"And you're correct I'm really not that serious about it..."

Well, I am serious about it, and maybe it's because I'm a former schoolteacher who despises ignorance, and, since I have flown small planes and been in the aerospace and defense business for about thirty years, I feel that I have an obligation to tell the truth, since my background gives me insights that most people on this board don't have.

"You gotta agree our weather is getting stranger every year, something is going on."

I gotta agree that modern rap music is gettting stupider every year, and I don't blame that on a "chem-trail" plot. SAT scores are going down, and I doubt that "chem-tails" have anything to do with that. You see, Anok, it's called "causality": the concept that something causes something else to happen. For the last two years before 9/11, the price of computer chips went down drastically. Then we had the attacks on the WTC.

Therefore, falling computer chip prices caused the attacks on WTC.

That's the kind of logic you're using, Anok. It's what scientists call "magic causality". Google it, if you like.

"And there is evidence of spraying in the past, why not now?"

We have evidence that there was chattel slavery in the United States up until the Civil war; therefore, why not now?

The United States dropped atomic bombs on Japan when I was a baby; therefore, we're probably dropping them now. Jesus died on the cross; therefore, he's dying on the cross right now.

That particular logicay fallacy is called "non sequitur" which is Latin for "it does not follow".

"-The only reason I post on this subject IS because of what I saw."

Exactly. You saw something you didn't know how to interpret, so you figured that it was "chem-trails".

"No amount of research or debunking is gonna change what I saw."

I'm pretty sure everyone here knows what value you put on research. You've made that quite clear.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 12:55 AM
link   
While I was in aviation, I was not a pilot and only took a few lessons years ago. Therefore, my syntax might be slightly off, so someone that is a pilot here feel free to correct any mistakes I make, but:

What you are most likely seeing is simply cargo planes or through traffic flying along victor lines at slightly higher altitude then the commercial local traffic in the same area.

Aircraft fly along in straight lines following their routes and a radio beacon (victor Airways) that makes a road in the sky. Where these beacons cross is where you see your criss-cross patterns. Through traffic is allowed to continue through the area at higher altitudes then the locally routed traffic and flies at higher speed. The altitude increase and accompanying temperature drop is what makes their vapor trails look different then the lower local traffic that is being funneled around into the approach to your local airport. From the ground, you may or may not notice an altitude difference of a few thousand feet, but it will alter the temperature, and barometric pressure, and thus affect the trail the plane leaves behind it.

Additionally, freight planes, especially US Postal planes, are often windowless and plain white. Because they do not have passenger restrictions they fly higher and faster then the commercial traffic, and military stuff can go even higher yet.

So why are there more lines then before?
I suggest you first look to see if there are more routes over-flying your area then before. While you might not be aware of any growth at your local airport, you might be under a new route to say LA that moves hundreds of through flights at these higher altitudes per day, thus increasing your local air traffic although the destination airport many be hundreds of miles away from you.


Ps... Still cannot see these pictures, can someone post them. It sounds like they might be of a fuel dump.

A plane often takes off weighing more then it can safely land and plans on the burning of fuel to make its landing weight acceptable at the destination. If a plane has to make an emergency landing for any reason, they often have to dump fuel somewhere safe to lessen their landing weight.


[edit on 1/23/2005 by defcon5]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:03 AM
link   
The thing is Defcan5 this was a one off event, not normal everyday flight traffic.
And the aircraft didn't just fly over and continue on their way, they turned and came back in the oposite dirction over and over again for the almost 2 hrs I watched, and they weren't done when I quite watching.
2 aircraft flying on oposite directions over and over again with a huge white trail that slowly spread into a complete cloud cover.
It's not something you see over the skies of San Francisco everyday...
Like this;




posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:38 AM
link   
Originally posted by Off_The_Street

I think most of the other people have accepted the basic meteorology and physics as being a good explanation; that's why most people agree that the whole "chem-trail" thing has been pretty well debunked.

You think, look at the posts on here I think you'll find more ppl believing than not.

It sounds like you're saying, in effect, that you saw something you didn't understand, so you ascribed it to "chem-trails". Hey, this is a free country; if you want to believe in "chem-trails" rather than do the research, it's certainly your privilege to do so.

What other explanation can there be for what I saw? Nobody has come up with one yet. What research will explain it?

"And you're correct I'm really not that serious about it..."

Well, I am serious about it, and maybe it's because I'm a former schoolteacher who despises ignorance, and, since I have flown small planes and been in the aerospace and defense business for about thirty years, I feel that I have an obligation to tell the truth, since my background gives me insights that most people on this board don't have.

But how can you be telling the truth? Unless you have inside information from top secret military operations you can not know for sure the spraying is not taking place. You only have your opinion, nothing more. I also have been in the aircraft industry and flown in many military jets, from land and sea.

"You gotta agree our weather is getting stranger every year, something is going on."

[i/]I gotta agree that modern rap music is gettting stupider every year, and I don't blame that on a "chem-trail" plot. SAT scores are going down, and I doubt that "chem-tails" have anything to do with that. You see, Anok, it's called "causality": the concept that something causes something else to happen. For the last two years before 9/11, the price of computer chips went down drastically. Then we had the attacks on the WTC.

Therefore, falling computer chip prices caused the attacks on WTC.

That's the kind of logic you're using, Anok. It's what scientists call "magic causality". Google it, if you like.

You never heard of putting 2 and 2 together, your analogies are stupid, mine fit the scenario. I wasn't blaiming the weather on chem-trails. Our weather is messing up, I was just adding a possible probable reason for spraying the atmosphere. It all adds up.

"And there is evidence of spraying in the past, why not now?"

We have evidence that there was chattel slavery in the United States up until the Civil war; therefore, why not now?

The United States dropped atomic bombs on Japan when I was a baby; therefore, we're probably dropping them now. Jesus died on the cross; therefore, he's dying on the cross right now.

That particular logicay fallacy is called "non sequitur" which is Latin for "it does not follow".


Well we know for sure those things are not happening. They have sprayed before, so why not now? There are lots of events that add up chem-spraying being real. If they've done it before they will do it again.

"-The only reason I post on this subject IS because of what I saw."

Exactly. You saw something you didn't know how to interpret, so you figured that it was "chem-trails".

Like I said, tell me what I saw then, because to me chem-spraying is what it looked like and until it can be explained another way then that is what I'm gonna think it was. Because it's been done before, I have no doubt they could be doing it again. And what I saw corelates with what many other witneses have also seen.

"No amount of research or debunking is gonna change what I saw."

I'm pretty sure everyone here knows what value you put on research. You've made that quite clear.

I put a lot of value on research, don't judge me just on one post and subject. I could spend all my valuable time researching this but I see no point. I'm going by my witness of an event, and any amount of research won't explain away what I saw.

Is this normal air traffic?




posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   
I spent so much time on this post I feel the need to post it again here:


I first began to notice that something wasn't right when I worked closing shift at Wendy's. I would often stay up after I got home from work and watch the sunrise. Very often that summer I would see a clear blue sky invaded by spraying. This is before I had even heard anything about chemtrails. Soon enough the trails would spread out and connect. I immediately "knew" inside that they were spraying clouds. I asked my dad, who works for the NY State Department of Military and Naval Affairs to ask about it at the armory. He asked his superior who told him it was "some experiment". I searched on the internet and found that, apparently, some people thought this was more sinister than cloud-making.

I am really frustrated that people will not accept that this is going on. I try to rationalize it and I know it takes an above-average individual to notice it with all the densensitiation going on. But I fear that some people are taking a stance that chemtrails don't exist for the sake of arguing.

There are patents; these confirm the possibility, but, as you say, don't guarantee it is happening. Then I read about FAA controllers being told to divert commercial aircraft from restricted airspace for "climate modification" (yes "climate" is the word that the military commander used in conversing with a certain ATC controller). I am putting my trust into the materials I read. I do trust the conspiracy web sites somewhat, but I espescially trust nationally recognized newspapers. I also see "chemtrails" acknowledged and attempted to be banned in the Congressional Record.
I am also big into the metaphysical and I have many dreams about chemtrails. One particular dream which I believe was the higher powers trying to get me realize how serious this was went like this:

I was out on my deck where I usually watch for chemtrails snapping pictures with glee. Then this white powder came from the sky that looked like snow and got in my eyes and i felt them burn.

When I see chemtrails being displayed in advertisements and backgrounds of movies in an attempt to desensitize us to them, I know something is not right. I see the mainstream media avoidance of this subject as a bad sign. I belive the so-called "leaks" and the available patents about weather or climate modification is disinformation, provided to maintain calm among those aware of the operations, by letting them know something is indeed going on. If it was for weather or climate modification the people would be told. All of the current talk about global warming is taken in by the people without a terrible reaction. So I don't think a climate modification plan would cause panic.

I can't recall easily all the supporting facts that I know. When I read about it now I no longer take in facts that support something is going on. I am already convicted.

That being said there is too much going on to be coincidence. Respitory ailments has gone from being the 8th (iirc) to the 5th leading cause of death since 1999, the year that most agree chemtrail spraying began. Meanwhile, overall smoking has decreased. Alzheimer's, of which aluminum is belived to be a cause, has had a 1200% increase in cause of death since 1979, though this may be due to it not being well known until now.

I hope this post gives some insight into where I'm coming from.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Off_The_Street
You can rant and rave and refuse to believe anything that is put in front of you. That is your right and choice and it certainly seems to be your style. But it is very disturbing to see the glee and self righteousness in how you jump to accuse so many people of trying to con you.

Well you can relax in this one case at least because I would never do that. Conning people does not entertain me or benefit me in any way and I certainly don't have time for it.

The evidence is building on this issue and fortunately that process will not be deterred by knee-jerk, "I know best" posts such as yours. Eventually the research in this area could benefit and enlighten you and your loved ones. At that point, I trust you will have a moment of reflection.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Anok says:

”The thing is Defcan5 this was a one off event, not normal everyday flight traffic.

So you’re basing your whole belief system on seeing a single incident that you can’t explain?

[Regarding most people not believing in “chem-trails”] ’You think, look at the posts on here I think you'll find more ppl believing than not.”

When I was talking about “most people”, I was talking about most people in the world -- like all the scientists, engineers, aviation workers, pilots, meteorologists, news reporters, military, decision makers, and just plain voters -- not a couple thousand folks on a few conspiracy sites.

”What other explanation can there be for what I saw? Nobody has come up with one yet. What research will explain it?”

I didn’t see what you saw that one time in San Francisco. But If you’re asking for “research” why haven’t you -- or anyone in the “chem-trail” believer community -- ever actually done some research, like with Flight Explorer? What is it about research that frightens the “chem-trail” believers, anyway? I mean if you really were “seekers after truth”, wouldn’t you … well, be “seeking after truth”? Am I missing something here?

“But how can you be telling the truth? Unless you have inside information from top secret military operations you can not know for sure the spraying is not taking place.”

No. I don’t know for sure. But for all the reasons that I and a lot of other skeptics have raised -- and delineated over and over again on this and a bunch of other forums -- most people believe that the chance of some Humongous Bad Guy Plot is about as likely as the chance that I am secretly married to the Queen of England.

And I guess that those reasons must be pretty universal, because there hasn’t been a single journalist who has even tried to break the Story Of The Century, even the guys who brought Nixon down, and broke the news about Clinton poking an intern or Bush lying about WMD. It’s pretty obvious that the newspaper reporters -- especially the foreign ones -- aren’t afraid of breaking any story at all. Yet none of them has ever done so with “chem-trails”.

Hmmmmm.

”You only have your opinion, nothing more. I also have been in the aircraft industry and flown in many military jets, from land and sea.”

That just shows that you can “be in the aircraft industry” and not know anything about aircraft engines or meteorology.

”You never heard of putting 2 and 2 together…”

Yes, but when I do, they equal 4, not 666.

”…your analogies are stupid, mine fit the scenario...”

Anok, you don’t have any analogies, and my analogies were your views LOL!

”I put a lot of value on research, don't judge me just on one post and subject.”

Anok, that’s all I have to judge you on. If there’s anything that you have done some serious research on, I haven’t seen it, and I know that you haven’t done any serious research on “chem-trails”. I think if you were to actually do something like that, you would, if not change your mind, at least have some coherent basis for your views.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Joepits says:

”I immediately "knew" inside that they were spraying clouds.”

You mean you didn’t even think of metrological aspects of the cirrus cloud formation? Why not? Was it that you don’t understand such things? There’s nothing wrong with that; there are a lot of things I don’t understand, either. But I try not to come to conclusions based on the fact that I don’t understand stuff. It seems like you did just that.

“I am really frustrated that people will not accept that this is going on. I try to rationalize it and I know it takes an above-average individual to notice it with all the densensitiation going on.”

Are you saying that you’re an “above-average individual” and engineers with 30 years aerospace experience like me and all my colleagues and everyone else in the business and all the scientists and professors and pilots et., etc., etc. are “below-average individuals” because we all disagree with you?

Isn’t that just a teensy bit arrogant on your part?

“But I fear that some people are taking a stance that chemtrails don't exist for the sake of arguing.”

I’m taking the stance that “chem-trails” don’t exist because I believe, based on my education and experience, that they don’t. I can’t speak for anyone else, though.

”There are patents; these confirm the possibility, but, as you say, don't guarantee it is happening.”

Exactly. There are also patents for using Hydrogen bombs to dig canals and harbors, and for automatic hair-combing machines.

“Then I read about FAA controllers being told to divert commercial aircraft from restricted airspace for "climate modification" (yes "climate" is the word that the military commander used in conversing with a certain ATC controller).”

And of course you can document all this, joepits. Right?

”I am putting my trust into the materials I read.”

Remind me to give you some election campaign materials from the Democrats and the Republicans ROFLMAO!!

Here’s a novel idea: instead of just putting your trust in what you read, why not expand your reading to look at scientific journals and basic Meteorology 101 and atmospheric textbooks?

“I do trust the conspiracy web sites somewhat, but I espescially trust nationally recognized newspapers.”

You must be talking about the expose on “chem-trails” last year in the LA Times and the Washington Post.
You don’t remember seeing them? Funny, I don’t either!

Just what “nationally recognized newspapers” did you read about the “chem-trail” plot?

“I also see "chemtrails" acknowledged and attempted to be banned in the Congressional Record.”

Are you talking about Dennis Kucinich’s bill which he withdrew from consideration and replaced with something from which the “chem-trail” stuff was taken out? The one where he reintroduced it the next session without any of the “chem-trail” information after he said that one of his staffers had put it in?

Maybe you ought to actually research Kookcinich’s bill instead of just repeating what someone on a conspiracy thread said. You do know how to do a “Thomas” search, don’t you?

“I am also big into the metaphysical and I have many dreams about chemtrails. One particular dream which I believe was the higher powers trying to get me realize how serious this was went like this:”

Okay. You believe something is bad because you had a dream about it.

I can understand that. I dreamed that I went to work without any pants on, and I now believe that no pants on the job is bad, too.

“When I see chemtrails being displayed in advertisements and backgrounds of movies in an attempt to desensitize us to them, I know something is not right.”

You don’t suppose that those pictures are just pictures of the sky with normal persistent contrails? I mean, if there are contrails, are you suggesting that the guys advertising Levi’s should airbrush them out? Oooh-kay!

“I see the mainstream media avoidance of this subject as a bad sign.”

I think that the mainstream media who’re aware of this (about one percent of the total, probably) believe it’s all a hoax, that’s why they avoid it. Probably most people aren’t even aware that there are people who believe in “chem-trails”.

”I belive the so-called "leaks" and the available patents about weather or climate modification is disinformation, provided to maintain calm among those aware of the operations, by letting them know something is indeed going on.’

Now that makes a lot of sense. Since they want us to stay calm and not know about the plot, they’re telling us about it.

Hey, joepits! Maybe you are one of those deliberate leakers yourself! Yeah! That’s the ticket!

“I can't recall easily all the supporting facts that I know.”

I understand. It’s easy to forget “supporting facts” especially if you have to rely on them to get your point across.

When I read about it now I no longer take in facts…”

You mean, you don’t pay any attention to facts and just look for something that already supports your convictions? Hmmm.

“That being said there is too much going on to be coincidence. Respitory ailments has gone from being the 8th (iirc) to the 5th leading cause of death since 1999, the year that most agree chemtrail spraying began.”

But what does that prove, Joepits? The overall environmental quality of the air has certainly changed over the past years; perhaps this has something to do with it. And while smoking has decreased over the past ten years, with a lot of smokers quitting, often COPD (chronic obstructional pulmonary disease) shows up in an aging population years after quitting smoking. If you look at national demographics, you will see that the largest demographic cohort in the United States is people like me, in their late fifties and early sixties. COPD strikes older populations disproportionately.


[edit on 23-1-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Revenge says:

”… it is very disturbing to see the glee and self righteousness in how you jump to accuse so many people of trying to con you.”

I certainly don’t think that you -- or Joepitts, or Anok -- are trying to con me. I assume that all three of you are basically good guys whose hearts are in the right place, but just don’t have the background in atmospherics physic and meteorology to understand the actual phenomena that cause what you consider “chem-trails”.

The con-men I am upset with are the ones who are conning you.

“Well you can relax in this one case at least because I would never do that. Conning people does not entertain me or benefit me in any way and I certainly don't have time for it.”

I agree. See above.

”The evidence is building on this issue and fortunately that process will not be deterred by knee-jerk, "I know best" posts such as yours. Eventually the research in this area could benefit and enlighten you and your loved ones. At that point, I trust you will have a moment of reflection.”

What “research”? I certainly have not seen any from the “chem-trail” believers, just the same quotes from the same sites, over and over again.

For example, have you -- or any “chem-trail” believer -- ever taken a subscription to Flight Explorer and actually recorded the “chem-trail” flights to determine exactly what planes are involved?

Have you -- or any “chem-trail” believer -- ever gone to the various atmospheric physics and Meteorology journals and worked your way through them?

Have you -- or any “chem-trail” believer -- ever taken a course in atmospheric physics or meteorology?

Hve you -- or any “chem-trail” believer -- done any real, objective research at all?

Because if you haven’t, I’m afraid it’ll be a long time before I will be able to have that “moment of reflection”.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:19 PM
link   
off_the_street.

ok you win. you're obviously much more informed and intelligent than me.

but anyways, id get the sources im talking about up here if this book here had an index. i don't feel like doing all the work of skimming it to find the parts again to try to teach this old dog some new tricks. you're obviously a prodcut of many years of government psyops. you probably still think it was "al quaeda" who was behind the 9/11.

[edit on 23-1-2005 by joepits]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 03:50 PM
link   
You mean it wasn't the International House of Pancakes?



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Anok says:

”The thing is Defcan5 this was a one off event, not normal everyday flight traffic.

So you’re basing your whole belief system on seeing a single incident that you can’t explain?

Actually I've seen it done on 2 occasions that were very obvious and other occasions that looked possible. My answer to Defcon 5 was in relation to commercial traffic. If this was an everyday occurrence over my city then I would be more inclined to think it's normal con-trails. But the aircraft activity I saw was not normal air traffic. They were creating large trails that looked nothing like normal con-trails. I watch the skies regularly, from my window I don't even have to look up.

Regarding most people not believing in “chem-trails”. You think, look at the posts on here I think you'll find more ppl believing than not.”

When I was talking about “most people”, I was talking about most people in the world -- like all the scientists, engineers, aviation workers, pilots, meteorologists, news reporters, military, decision makers, and just plain voters -- not a couple thousand folks on a few conspiracy sites.

Actually there are many pilots, air traffic controllers and military people who think chem-spraying is going on. If you think ppl on web-sights are not qualified to make claims such as chem-spraying then you also, because you are on a web-site, are not qualified to debunk them

”What other explanation can there be for what I saw? Nobody has come up with one yet. What research will explain it?”

I didn’t see what you saw that one time in San Francisco. But If you’re asking for “research” why haven’t you -- or anyone in the “chem-trail” believer community -- ever actually done some research, like with Flight Explorer? What is it about research that frightens the “chem-trail” believers, anyway? I mean if you really were “seekers after truth”, wouldn’t you … well, be “seeking after truth”? Am I missing something here?

You keep talking about this Flight Explorer magazine, why don't you post something from it that proves chem-trails are a hoax then? Do you really think a magazine would print information on a top secret operation?
You keep talking about research, well where do you research top secret military programs? I haven't asked for any research, I've only posted on this subject because of what I saw and I can't believe the close mindedness of some people. Everything can be explained away if you want to believe the explanation. Swamp gas for a UFO sighting is a good one that comes to mind


“But how can you be telling the truth? Unless you have inside information from top secret military operations you can not know for sure the spraying is not taking place.”

No. I don’t know for sure. But for all the reasons that I and a lot of other skeptics have raised -- and delineated over and over again on this and a bunch of other forums -- most people believe that the chance of some Humongous Bad Guy Plot is about as likely as the chance that I am secretly married to the Queen of England.

Why would it have to be "bad guy" pilots. Military personnel do what they are ordered to, and I'm sure they believe what they are doing is beneficial.
For some reason you have this belief that I think what they're doing is bad. I don't. The reason I think it's secret is because the reason they are doing it would panic people. The chemicals used may have side effects on people but I don't think they are trying to harm people. You seem to think that's what chem-trail believers think, but it's not.


And I guess that those reasons must be pretty universal, because there hasn’t been a single journalist who has even tried to break the Story Of The Century, even the guys who brought Nixon down, and broke the news about Clinton poking an intern or Bush lying about WMD. It’s pretty obvious that the newspaper reporters -- especially the foreign ones -- aren’t afraid of breaking any story at all. Yet none of them has ever done so with “chem-trails”.

There are and have been many secret military operations that do not make it to the press. C'mon you know the press is controlled and they only print what they want us to know. To think it can't be true cause it's not on the news is pretty naive IMHO

Hmmmmm.

”You only have your opinion, nothing more. I also have been in the aircraft industry and flown in many military jets, from land and sea.”

That just shows that you can “be in the aircraft industry” and not know anything about aircraft engines or meteorology.

Meteorology does not explain what I and countless others have witnessed, sorry. And you have shown that "being in the aircraft industry" can make you very closed minded.

”You never heard of putting 2 and 2 together…”

Yes, but when I do, they equal 4, not 666.

Who ever mentioned anything about this being evil or a plot to kill us? I didn't, you are letting your skeptical mind fill in blanks that are not there. It's been done before, lots of people have seen it being done now, the atmosphere is messed up, add that together.

”I put a lot of value on research, don't judge me just on one post and subject.”

Anok, that’s all I have to judge you on. If there’s anything that you have done some serious research on, I haven’t seen it, and I know that you haven’t done any serious research on “chem-trails”. I think if you were to actually do something like that, you would, if not change your mind, at least have some coherent basis for your views.

What view's, all I'm saying is I saw an event that I have found no other explanation for other than chem-spraying ( i actually don't like that term cause it makes it sound more sinister than it probably is) Until someone can provide me with rock solid evidence that what I saw was not chem-spraying then I'll keep believing that's what it was.
So where do you do research on top secret military operations? Flight Explorer?...ROTFL!!


www.flightexplorer.com...

[edit on 23/1/2005 by ANOK]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 10:34 PM
link   
Anok says:

"You keep talking about this Flight Explorer magazine, why don't you post something from it that proves chem-trails are a hoax then? Do you really think a magazine would print information on a top secret operation?"

Obviously you were too busy "researching" something else to go to the web-site I posted for you, Anok.

Here it is again:

www.flightexplorer.com... *sigh*

Flight Explorer is not a magazine. Flight Explorer is a program. It is an Internet-based real-time global flight tracking information, reporting and display system.

You can download it for free, and then you pay the company a monthly fee (starting at $10/month for smaller users, up to $2 or 300 a month if you're an FBO doing it full time).

What Flight Explorer does is link your home computer to every single FAA site in the country, and you can see every single commercial aircraft in the air over the US and Canada -- in real time (actually, there's a five-minute delay that the FAA imposes on personal users, but it's close enought for you to use just fine). You can also zoom into a smaller area and do a lot of other filtering, too. Superimposed over the map of wherever you're zoomed in on is a bunch of triangles, showing the aircraft that are above you right now.

Each triangle has its vector, its flight number, city of origin, city to where it's going, and its altitude. What this means you could do (well, what a researcher could do) is to go outside and look up and see a Evil "chem-trail" Sprayer passing overhead on, say, a north-to-south heading, and then, right behind it, you wil see another airplane, thist time without a "chem-trail". Uh- oh!!

So you run into your house and fire up your puter and you see that the "chem-trail" plane is United 223 from El Paso to San Diego, and it's at 35,000 feet. And how about the plane right behind it without a "chem-trail"?

Why, it's Southwest 4106, also from El Paso to San diego, but it's at 32,000 feet!

Hello! It looks like it's not "unmarked white military airplanes" after all! And the Southwest plane isn't "spraying" because it's three thousand feet lower, and the air is probably just a bit warmer enough so that the ice crystals will sublime back to water vapor in a minute or less!

Now you (or a researcher) spend a couple of bucks and a couple of hours and you take notes and you find out that 99 percent of the "chem-planes" are just old commercial aviation jobbers. About every hundredth airplane you see will not show up on Flight Explorer, because it doesn't track foreign registry or military planes, but you have good, sound data on the other 99 out of a hundred flights.

Hmmm. "Good, sound, data". Why-- that almost sounds like research, doesn't it?

It took me about an hour to work the filters and do the lookups on mine when I got it about three years ago; and the newer versions, I understand, are even easier to use.

But that's probably too much work. I think most people would rather just reprint what they saw on another site than to actually do any thinking or researching on their own, n'est-ce pas?


jra

posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Off_The_Street: I have found your posts to be good and factual. I think it's rather silly when some people call you (or others that argue against chemtrails) as being ignorant and closeminded. When all you're doing is telling them to do actual research and learn about meteorology etc. How telling some one to learn something is being ignorant is beyond me.

Anyway I just wanted to thank you for the time and effort you put into your posts. Also, the flight explorer program looks cool. I'll be checking that out for sure.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Thanks, eh.

And I really like your CF-105.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Off the Street, did you not notice the link I posted at the bottom of my post?



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I’ve stayed away from this thread since OTS was doing a great job at pointing out the fallacies in the chemtrails argument.

I would like to point out that the initial post of this thread

Originally posted by Termite197
I found these pictures to be amazing. They are very clear and are from a plane. Check them out here:

www.holmestead.ca...

[edit on 20-1-2005 by Termite197]


pointed to a site that is a complete and total hoax. The pictures were all lifted off of Airliners.net. Which is why the page has been changed.

The original page claimed that the pictures were from a single pilot, etc. All of which has disappeared.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Revenge says:

" I have seen, on multiple occasions, two similar 4 engine jet aircraft go over the same area at approximately the same altitude, speed and direction..."

Approximately -- that's the key word. Did you read my comment above about the difference in altitudes pushing the condensation threshhold? If not, why not do so?

"On a more disturbing level, I know some intelligence people that I trust who tell me that there is a program to artificially alter the atmosphere and that there is intimidation and false PR going on regarding that."

Of course you do, Revenge. There's this one guy on one of the chats who says the same thing about some military guy who he claims tells him the same thing ...

...and I don't believe him, either.

And the reason I don't is that this guy (who doesn't publish an e-mail or say who he is) expects us to buy into the fact that a person would tell him some supposedly classified material so he can blab it all over a conspiracy site on the Internet.

Do you really expect people with an IQ equal to or better than room temperature to believe you when you tell us that someone whose name you won't say has told you all this stuff? Gimme me a break! If you can't come up with any evidence, be honest and say you can't. don't make stuff up and expect us all to buy into it.

I may have been born at night, but I wasn't born last night.

Can u provide evidence that they are not spraying?

Thats what I thought.....!

I'ts a debate about an issue and he provided some INFO that he thought was relevent. Hummm.....isnt that what ATS is for?



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
Off the Street....I know I've said this over and over again but what else can I do.....I witnessed SOMETHING that was NOT normal aircraft traffic that looked suspiciously like the chem-spraying that ppl are talking about.
And until someone can come up with another explanation of what I saw, which you haven't yet, then I will go with chem-spraying.

And you're correct I'm really not that serious about it, and I'm far from being scared about it...LOL. I've got far more things to keep my anxiety running thank you. I don't think they're doing anything to harm us. If I was to make a guess I would say they're trying to reverse the effects of global warming or dimming.
You gotta agree our weather is getting stranger every year, something is going on. Obviously they would keep it secret as to not panic the population, nothing new there. And there is evidence of spraying in the past, why not now?
The only reason I post on this subject IS because of what I saw. I've been on this planet long enough and have enough experience to know when something doesn't look right, and what I saw was not right.
No amount of research or debunking is gonna change what I saw.
It was SO obvious if you had seen it you would be agreeing with me.
And you have yet to convince anybody it's not happening.
You can deny things all day long, it don't make it so.

I have no agenda here, no reason to lie. I have nothing to gain by making a false claim....Do you?

Preach on!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join