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.

 

Chemtrails, Nye County, NV, 2-8-05

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:
apc

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Don't forget contrails can act as a catalyst for cirrus cloud formation in the right conditions. A legitimate concern among the weather circles as the recent years of skyrocketing (hehe) air travel alone could alter weather patterns. A skinny little contrail can trigger cirrus cloud formation along its entire length.

Last week was engineer week? Wheres my card?! Damn you Hallmark!!



dh

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Interesting photos Desert Rat. It looks like your area has at least one chembuster in operation and a lot of ground littering with orgonite devices
The trails have varying degrees of hold , and I see no evidence of a white-out or ozone smog such as result from a successful operation
By The Way, apart from trying to download a couple of pieces of adware, you notice how fake those pictures Howard's favorite site presents look?


apc

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Ever notice how fake the clouds look when you're looking down at them from above?

And the pictures in the pictures in the original posts appear to be taken in a desert valley... if you know anything about thermal convection then you get the point.

> whoa... glitch in the matrix, mang.

[edit on 2-3-2005 by apc]


dh

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
Ever notice how fake the clouds look when you're looking down at them from above?

And the pictures in the pictures in the original posts appear to be taken in a desert valley... if you know anything about thermal convection then you get the point.


In there with the response. The issues are a bit more debatable
Predator exposed



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by dh
Interesting photos Desert Rat. It looks like your area has at least one chembuster in operation and a lot of ground littering with orgonite devices
The trails have varying degrees of hold , and I see no evidence of a white-out or ozone smog such as result from a successful operation
By The Way, apart from trying to download a couple of pieces of adware, you notice how fake those pictures Howard's favorite site presents look?

The pictures posted by howard are a rare situation in which normal jet contrails persisted. Chemtrails are not very rare. Though I'm thinking the project is coming to a close because they don't do it as often as they used to. Maybe I just noticed it more in the summer because I was out more. Funny because the air is warmer in the summer so "persistant jet trails" would be less common.

I see your familiar with the orgone. Thats very good; not too many people on here are. I don't have a chembuster but I keep my room pretty liveable with a nice chunk of quartz that I wrap a gold chain around.



[edit on 1-3-2005 by joepits]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   
STEADHAM'S STUDIES

If they are really interested in measuring the effects of various aerial activities on cloud cover, NASA wizards ought to contact Mark Steadham. To plumb the mystery plumes, the previous winter Steadham correlated 46 personal observations of jet traffic over Houston with airliner identification provided by a computer program called “Flight Explorer”. This consumer software also uses “real time” FAA tracking to plot commercial flight paths across the USA. It does not track military flights, which are identified only as unidentified aircraft.

After using “Flight Explorer” to identify the airliners and military aircraft passing overhead, Steadham timed their respective plumes. Some examples tell this chem tale:

12/02/00

11:00 am ~4-8 hrs. (military)

11:45 am ~2 minutes (commercial)

12:00 noon ~2 minutes 10 sec. (commercial)

12/08/00

08:50 pm 10 seconds (commercial)

01:00 pm ~4-8 hrs. (military)

01:00 pm 10 seconds (commercial)

12/21/00

08:50 am 20 seconds (commercial)

09:00 am ~4-8 hrs. (military)

09:40 am ~4-8 hrs. (military)

10:10 am 20 seconds (commercial)

Steadham also found:

All confirmed contrails lasting 15 seconds or less: 72%

All confirmed contrails lasting 30 seconds or less: 80%

All confirmed contrails lasting 2 minutes or less: 96%



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:27 AM
link   
joepits says:

"...a rare situation in which normal jet contrails persisted."

Why, my goodness, joepits! Then what could cause 'normal jet contrails' to persist, pray tell?

Could it be ... ghasp!... a particular combination of ... hmmm, let's see now ... temperature and humidity?

Of course, now you're contradicting everything that the "chem-trail" devotees ever said; when pressed, they always seem to say that "a contrail doesn't persist, but a 'chem-trail' does."

Now you're saying that, under certain conditions, contrails persist, too!

Well, then, given that you no longer consider persistence to be a discriminator, what is the difference between contrails and "chem-trails"?



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   
joepits says:

"STEADHAM'S STUDIES
If they are really interested in measuring the effects of various aerial activities on cloud cover, NASA wizards ought to contact Mark Steadham."


Before we go any further, I think you chould contact Mr. Steadham and ask him just whom it was that he released his study to before he published it on his website in 2001. Ironically enough, Steadham's first reviewer read the entire document on a laptop on Delta flight 48 from LAX to Tokyo Narita, at 32,000 feet, probably spraying "chem-trails" as he did so!

"To plumb the mystery plumes, the previous winter Steadham correlated 46 personal observations of jet traffic over Houston with airliner identification provided by a computer program called “Flight Explorer”."

And this is exactly the same program I have been talking about to people who pretend to be researchers. And guess who it was that turned me on to it?

Yes! Mark Steadham!

"This consumer software also uses “real time” FAA tracking to plot commercial flight paths across the USA. It does not track military flights, which are identified only as unidentified aircraft."

"After using “Flight Explorer” to identify the airliners and military aircraft passing overhead, Steadham timed their respective plumes. Some examples tell this chem tale:"


Rather than cherry-pick, joepits, why don't you publish Mark's site so that we can see the entire report? It turns out that there were just as many persistent contrails from identified aircraft (i.e., civilian ones0 as there were from unidentified ones (i.e., military ones).

You do have the link to the original report, don't you?

"Steadham also found:
All confirmed contrails lasting 15 seconds or less: 72%
All confirmed contrails lasting 30 seconds or less: 80%
All confirmed contrails lasting 2 minutes or less: 96%"


And how do you define "confirmed contrails", joepits? By the fact that they dissipated?

If that's the case, then you're saying is "we know that these are 'confirmed' contrails because they dissipated. And look! All the 'confirmed' contrails dissipated!"

That's what scientists call "circular logic", joepits.

Now why don't you get the link (which, of course, you have, right?) to Mark's report and publish it for all to look at.

And, since you've already taken two semesters each of engineering physics and engineering chemistry, we can do a quick statistical analysis (you can do that, right?) to come up with a correlative for persistence and identification type.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:03 AM
link   
"Which are identified only as unidentified aircraft."

Sorry but this bit made me laugh.

These guys are crazy. I have lived underneath flight paths for commercial and military aircraft all of my life and have seen contrails from many types of aircraft respond to all different types of atmospheric conditions. If there aircraft were used to distribute chemichals then they certainly would not do so from such an innefective altitude (~25 000-28 000 ft?) considering that anything they releaded would be so totally dispersed by air currents on any given day.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   
James, absolutely.

And when you look at the satellite photos of the earth, you'll see a lot of persistent contrails over the ocean, too. you gotta ask youself who are they planning to deliver these "drugs" to -- the fish?

Wind currents dispersing the "fallout" -- plus the fact that there're so many contrails over the ocean -- pretty well eliminates the idea that contrails can contain some form of drug or inhalant.

And, of course, the fact that contrails appear without regard of where there is particularly high UV insolation pretty much eliminates their role as a potential means for 'stopping global warming' -- especially since, by blocking IR radiation at night, persistent contrails and the cirrus clouds they form probably do as much to keep the planet warmer at night as they do to keep it cooler in the daytime.

Which pretty much leaves "chem-trails" as a Plot without a Plan.

[edit on 2-3-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by joepits
Though I'm thinking the project is coming to a close because they don't do it as often as they used to. Maybe I just noticed it more in the summer because I was out more.

It's good to see your methadology is grounded in good hard science.



Funny because the air is warmer in the summer so "persistant jet trails" would be less common.

Do you not read anything else that is posted? It has been said over and over again that the temperature at ground level is not relevent to the temperature at high altitude.



I see your familiar with the orgone. Thats very good; not too many people on here are. I don't have a chembuster but I keep my room pretty liveable with a nice chunk of quartz that I wrap a gold chain around.


Again, nice to see that science is at the heart of everything you do. Are you really doing engineering at college? Are you sure it isn't New Age Studies, or some other crap like that?



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Hey, Joe. Go over to Mark Steadham’s (Thermit) site and dig around in the forum archives. If Mech hasn’t deleted them, try and find any posts by “canex” or even by “dogbreath” (an earlier screen name). Although he never officially confirmed it, Canex is widely acknowledged to be the NASA Wizard himself, Patrick Mimus.

While we are on the subject of Mark Steadham, if you frequent his site, you may notice that he rarely posts on his forum anymore and has turned over the majority of the forum administrative duties to Mech. In one of his posts about a year back, Steadham (thermit) acknowledged that persistent contrails exists.

And as for this statement:


Originally posted by joepits
The pictures posted by howard are a rare situation in which normal jet contrails persisted.


According to the latest atmospheric research, that is not true.


Principal Investigator
Dr K. Gierens and Dr. P. Spichtinger
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre
DLR
Münchener Strasse 20
82234 Wessling/Obb.
Germany
“There is now plenty of evidence that ice-supersaturation is frequent in upper tropospheric clear air and that it does even occur in the lowermost stratosphere. . . .
Additionally, laboratory work on homogeneous freezing nucleation of aqueous solution droplets (an important cirrus formation mechanism below -40°C) suggests that substantial ice-supersaturation (>40%) must be present in the tropopause region (Koop et al., 2000).”
source


In situ measurements have confirmed this:


Recent measurements made near the tropical tropopause during the NASA Cirrus Regional Study of Tropical Anvils and Cirrus Layers - Florida Area Cirrus Experiment (CRYSTAL-FACE) indicate persistent ice saturation ratios (s i ) of about 1.2–1.3 in cold ice clouds
source

and:


the researchers examined the relative humidity with respect to ice (RHI) in the three regions. They found that ice supersaturation (RHI > 100%) occured most frequently in the ice crystal formation region where cloud updraft velocities are typically the strongest, but also occurred frequently in the growth region.

Specifically, their study showed that ice supersaturation occurred about 31% of the time in cirrus clouds, confirming existing assumptions regarding the frequency of homogenous (non-aerosol related) cirrus formation. However, they also found that ice supersaturation often occurred at temperatures warmer than -40C, when heterogeneous (aerosol-related) cirrus formation typically occurs. This type of ice formation results in smaller ice particles, thereby increasing the resulting reflectivity of the cloud.
source

This has been documented for quite some time.


The existence of cloud free air masses in the state of supersaturation with respect to ice was proven almost 60 years ago. E. Glückauf (1945) found from hygrometer data obtained over southern England that (very high) supersaturation with respect to ice occurs very frequently in the upper troposphere. H.Weickmann concluded in his 1945 review paper on "Shapes and formation of atmospheric ice crystals" (Weickmann 1945) that ice crystals in the atmosphere, i.e. cirrus clouds, form mainly via the water phase and not as soon as ice saturation is reached. He characterized the ice forming regions in the upper troposphere and the (lowermost) stratosphere as regions of high ice-supersaturation but with small absolute humidity.
source

“Fine,” you say, “but what does this have to do with chemtrails?”
Well, nothing, since chemtrails don’t exist. But it does have a lot to do with contrails and more importantly, the formation of persistant contrails.


A good marker of ISSRs (ice-supersaturated regions) is persistent condensation trails (contrails) when the sky is otherwise free of clouds. Since the mixing process in an aircraft exhaust plume can create very high degrees of supersaturation even in dry ambient air, the formation of contrails does not require as high ambient humidity as the formation of natural cirrus. Contrails can therefore decorate the sky when no cirrus clouds are around. Contrail persistence however requires at least ice saturation.
(from the above link)

Therefore, once you understand the nature of ice supersaturation, the presence of persistent contrails in hardly a surprise.


apc

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   

I don't have a chembuster but I keep my room pretty liveable with a nice chunk of quartz that I wrap a gold chain around.


joepits...
I am now going to dismiss and not even bother to rapidly scan every statement that succeeds this one.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Here, by the way, is the link to Thermit’s report:

www.chemtrailcentral.com...

As I mentioned to Thermit when I provided him a critique of the report (which critique he had requested), the study is an extremely ambitious one, and, as such, involves several measurements which are not relevant to the goals of the study.

I’d mentioned that a simpler approach would be to ask the following questions:

1. Can we correlate contrails with atmospheric conditions?

In order to do this, of course, we’d have to have the altitude for each aircraft which creates a contrail, which means it’d have to show up as identified with altitude, vector, etc on the FE screen. Now you might say that this would eliminate from the study any of then “unidentified” aircraft, most of which are purported to be military. I know; but we’ll get back to them in a minute.

The next step would be to build a table of observed aircraft contrails. The number of days which it is overcast is irrelevant, since we wouldn’t be taking any measurements that day anyway. The table header would look like this:

Aircraft********Contrail Duration********Altitude********Temperature********Humidity

The time of the aircraft flight, its vector, speed, etc. are irrelevant, because all you want to do is to correlate the persistent contrail to the temperature/humidity

You’d get the flight number and altitude from FE, contrail duration from your own timed observation, and Temperature/Humidity from GOES atmospheric soundings. Noter that Thermit splits the difference in many cases by interpolating temperatures from neighboring regions; this is not the greatest thing around, since the atmosphere is very dynamic even over a 5000-feet altitude delta, but it’s the best we can do, and no one would fault Thermit for his interpolation.

What would this show? Well, you’d probably use a binomial distribution (or maybe a Poisson distribution, if the incidence is very low) to predict whether a contrail would be found at a particular temperature/humidity regime. But the actual measurement itself would be a simple correlative of “contrail duration of x or greater seconds” and “temperature is below minus 40 deg and RH is 100%” If it’s statistically significant within, say, the first sigma, you’ve pretty much determined what’s causing the contrails that persist for (plug in your number) of seconds.

2. Can you correlate persistent contrails with unidentified aircraft?

This is a lot easier, because all you have to do is to see an aircraft which doesn’t show up on the FE log, and time the persistence of its contrails (if it has any). Let’s say that, in a given week, you see 171 identifiable aircraft of which 134 produce contrails of interest (“interest” being persisting for a predetermined number of seconds). During that same period, you see 16 unidentifiable aircraft of which 14 produce contrails of interest.

Simple math shows that the commercial aircraft have an n of 0.78 and the unidentified aircraft have an n of 0.875 which, given the small sample size is statistically insignificant. So you could conclude that there isn’t any difference between a military or a civilian aircraft; they’re both equally likely, using binomial distribution, to produce contrails of interest.

But what if the commercial aircraft have an n of 0.1 and the military aircraft have an n of 0.85, and you have a significant sample?

Well, you can make several observations:

1. the military aircraft are flying at a higher altitude.

2. the military aircraft are using different fuel additives, such as Prist, which results in a different combustion characteristic.

3. The military aircraft are flying using different flight rules for their engines than are the commercial aircraft.

4. The military aircraft are emitting something other than the typical combustion byproducts and water vapor.

Now which one of those reasons is the real one? Well, you can’t tell; there’s just not enough information available.

But, unfortunately, despite all the graphs, Thermit never provides the basic correlation. He shows a lot of data, but not all of it, and it’s simply not organized right. But the good thing is that at leat he’s doing some real research. What needs to be done is to design the study with a lot more rigor, and do it again – and again – and again.

[edit on 2-3-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
What would be ideal would be to collect that data in an area with a LIDAR facility instead of relying on radio sondes or research aircraft flights.


dh

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Whooops - the contrail theorists have been left to talk amongst themselves
I wonder why


apc

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I have done intense research into the matter.. hacked multiple government owned computer systems, conducted live interviews with members of the NWO, flown halfway around the world, and I have discovered an answer to your question:

boredom. If you can figure out why you get a cookie.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
Yep...nothing but normal contrails in those pics.


You have absolutely no way of knowing that they are not chemtrails...assuming they are contrails is not wise.

The pics are interesting if not totally inconclusive...but better to be curious about a possible threat than to assume everythings fine and bury ones head in in the sand.


dh

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by joepits


I see your familiar with the orgone. Thats very good; not too many people on here are. I don't have a chembuster but I keep my room pretty liveable with a nice chunk of quartz that I wrap a gold chain around.



[edit on 1-3-2005 by joepits]

Hummm good Joe

I suggest you surround your quartz with an envelope of polyester resin and metal particles
I have a cloudbuster, comparing before and after aerial situations it works, though needs occasional adaptations, ie intents, to keep it going effectively
I have a house full of orgone generators and live within a few hundred feet of a multiple cell phone tower array
These connected effects are hard to keep at bay
I try to ensure the cell phone network within at least a mile is disabled
This helps break up the chemtrails
I check out the effects with a zapchecker em meter
Keeping the stuff out of your home can be difficult
I see that putting , an orgone generator in the form of a cone or pyramid of polyester resin, metal shavings and five quartz crystals, -an hhg (holy hand grenade - see Monty Pythons Holy Grail) on your electricity meter can cut your electricity bill by organising the flow and reducing frictional loss
I'm trying it



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geneticus

Originally posted by sensfan
Yep...nothing but normal contrails in those pics.


You have absolutely no way of knowing that they are not chemtrails...assuming they are contrails is not wise.

The pics are interesting if not totally inconclusive...but better to be curious about a possible threat than to assume everythings fine and bury ones head in in the sand.


And you have no way of knowing that they are not, in fact, magic pixie dust trails spread by flying gremlin / leprichaun crossbreeds.

Come on, prove that they are not. Bet cha can't


[edit on 2-3-2005 by HowardRoark]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join