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.

 

some chemtrail pictures from today in upstate NY

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
note the low altitude. i saw several white planes returning to refill leaving no contrails.






[edit on 20-2-2005 by joepits]

[edit on 20-2-2005 by joepits]




posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Yup, chemtrails alright, the chemical being H20, after being exhausted by passenger jets, and condensing to a frozen crystal state by the low temperatures that prevail in the upper altitudes.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlexofSkye
Yup, chemtrails alright, the chemical being H20, after being exhausted by passenger jets, and condensing to a frozen crystal state by the low temperatures that prevail in the upper altitudes.


so, you obviously went up there and tested the exhaust?

evidence points to the POSSIBILITY of an aerosol spraying program. there are patents, and MOTIVATION(global warming) for purposeful 'aerial obscuration'.
the influential edward teller, 'father of the atom bomb' is PARTICULARly interested in such programs.
the kind of response you typed here is just a NEOCONtrail. neocon propoganda leaves streaks, too.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Don't bother dealing with these idiots. Besides, I have more pics. Including some INTROVERTIBLE very wide chemtrails.





In these next there note this very wide lightly concentrated chemtrail. It is DEFINITELY NOT a regular jet trail NOR is it a cloud.

'








[edit on 20-2-2005 by joepits]

[edit on 20-2-2005 by joepits]



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Nice pics pf CONtrails. Chemtrails are a myth that don't exist in my opinion.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   
This must be the most ridiculous conpiracy theory in existance.

Those are jet contrails, but if it makes you happy go on posting pics of them...



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Nice trails, they arent that special to me any more since i live like 15 minutes away from an airport i see them everyday and not like 4 or 5 maybe 10 to 15 at a time but i cant get good pictures like that because i dont have a digital camera, and my camera phone is junk but the best time to see chemtrails are in the morning when the sun comes up



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
joepits, you say "notice the low altitude"

There is no way that you or anyone else can look up in the clear sky -- without any frame of reference whatsoever -- and even come close to determining the altitude.

And you say there're a lot more pictures you have of persistent contrails? "...Including some INTROVERTIBLE very wide chemtrails."

hey, joe, I have lots and lots of INCONTROVERTIBLE pictures of Christmas presents. How many of those photos will I need to provide proof of the existence of Santa Claus? ROFLMAO!!!!

Billybob says:

"so, you obviously went up there and tested the exhaust?
"


No, billybob; did you? After all, if you make some assertion about poisonous gases or some sort of atmosphere-blocking aerosol, shouldn't you be the one to show some evidence for your assertion?

"...evidence points to the POSSIBILITY of an aerosol spraying program. there are patents, and MOTIVATION(global warming) for purposeful 'aerial obscuration'."

Evidence points to the POSSIBILITY that I am the second coming of Jesus christ, too. I have sandals, like to break loaves of bread and drink wine on occasion, and I even used to have a beard.

But there's a POSSIBILITY of just about everything, including the fact that the world will end tomorrow. I don't see anyone selling off their property thoug, do you?

"the influential edward teller, 'father of the atom bomb' is PARTICULARly interested in such programs. "

Teller is considered the "father of the H-Bomb", not that atom bomb; he's in his dotage now, and he also suggested that we use hydrogen bombs to dig new harbors on the seacoast of California and also to "clean out" the Mississippi delta.

"...the kind of response you typed here is just a NEOCONtrail. neocon propoganda leaves streaks, too.
..."


Are you implying that liberals believe in "chem-trails" and conservatives don't?

That's odd; I didn't hear any of the liberal candidates for President (or Senator or Representative, for that matter) campaign on getting rid of "chem-trails" -- not even Dennis Kookcinich!



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
shadowman says:

"...the best time to see chemtrails are in the morning when the sun comes up,"

Well, the morning is usually the coldest time of the day, both at ground level and at 30,000 feet; so the atmosphere up there is more likely to be at minus forty deg or lower, which is what you need for persistent contrails.

Incidentally, if you believe that "chem-trails" are designed to block the sunlight and keep down global warming, wouldn't it make more sense to "spray" these "chem-trails" when they would actually be used -- that is, when the sun is already high in the sky?

Sounds to me like you're helping us debunk "chem-trails"!



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
djohnsto77 says:

"This must be the most ridiculous conpiracy theory in existance."

Actually, it's the second most ridiculous. I have to go with the Secret Nazi Caves in the Antarctic that lead down into the Hollow Earth.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Evidence points to the POSSIBILITY that I am the second coming of Jesus christ, too. I have sandals, like to break loaves of bread and drink wine on occasion, and I even used to have a beard.


then you understand mythmaking. the 'aerial obfuscation' of the mind.
i'm not saying republicans don't see chemtrails and 'believe' in them, i am saying that cointelpro propoganda agents(who are neocons/antarticearthcenterdwellingnazis by nature) use the same tactics to discourage certain thoughts. i believe in the thought police, offthestreet.
there is a difference in the thought processes of a liberal and a conservative. liberals, always accused of flipflopping, are open to new ideas, when they see old ideas are wrong, and new ideas a 'right'. republicans resist change, often being 'left' in the dust of change. so, although i never meant that it was a left/right thing, i guess it is, to a certain extent.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
djohnsto77 says:

"This must be the most ridiculous conpiracy theory in existance."

Actually, it's the second most ridiculous. I have to go with the Secret Nazi Caves in the Antarctic that lead down into the Hollow Earth.


i vote for 'osama did it 'cause he hates out freedom'. that's a lot of trouble to go through with nothing to be gained. i guess USAma wasn't thinking.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
djohnsto77 says:

"This must be the most ridiculous conpiracy theory in existance."

Actually, it's the second most ridiculous. I have to go with the Secret Nazi Caves in the Antarctic that lead down into the Hollow Earth.


I've got to go with that guy who said NWO were broadcasting messages in the half time period at the Superbowl, and Paul McCartney was in on it.

I don't see what being a liberal or conservative has to do with it. Any sensible and intelligant person demands evidence when someone presents a new theory, whatever their political affiliation. I'm a complete liberal "lefty", especially by US standards (I'm from the UK), however I agree completely with so the so called "conservative" skeptics on this thread.

I live in London, and every day of clear weather (alright, not that many) I walk out of my house to see cylindrical clouds (contrails) formed by planes over my flat. Would anyone care to tell me what chemical they are spaying me with? If not , what the hell is your point?!?


dh

posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke





I live in London, and every day of clear weather (alright, not that many) I walk out of my house to see cylindrical clouds (contrails) formed by planes over my flat. Would anyone care to tell me what chemical they are spaying me with? If not , what the hell is your point?!?


Greetings fellow Englander
Ignore the employees rationale and go here
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
joepits, you say "notice the low altitude"

There is no way that you or anyone else can look up in the clear sky -- without any frame of reference whatsoever -- and even come close to determining the altitude.

also note the trees. yeah you're an idiot.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by joepits

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
joepits, you say "notice the low altitude"

There is no way that you or anyone else can look up in the clear sky -- without any frame of reference whatsoever -- and even come close to determining the altitude.

also note the trees. yeah you're an idiot.


Whoa, hold on there buddy. What the other poster said is a well proven fact. If you really think you can judge distance, even realitive distance try this:

Go out and observe the moon at a normal height with no ground clutter nearby. Then measure by comparing it's size to, lets say, an outstretched finger.

Then, the next time you note the moon close to the horizon - how much larger does it appear? A lot. Now compare it's size realitive to a known object - guess what, it's still the same old moon - size and distance and all.

The human brain/eye's can be fooled quite easily.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starwars51

Originally posted by joepits

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
joepits, you say "notice the low altitude"

There is no way that you or anyone else can look up in the clear sky -- without any frame of reference whatsoever -- and even come close to determining the altitude.

also note the trees. yeah you're an idiot.


Whoa, hold on there buddy. What the other poster said is a well proven fact. If you really think you can judge distance, even realitive distance try this:

Go out and observe the moon at a normal height with no ground clutter nearby. Then measure by comparing it's size to, lets say, an outstretched finger.

Then, the next time you note the moon close to the horizon - how much larger does it appear? A lot. Now compare it's size realitive to a known object - guess what, it's still the same old moon - size and distance and all.

The human brain/eye's can be fooled quite easily.


OK. Well lets say I was fooled and they are really 30,000 feet high. In that case they would be extremely wide and that one in the last few pics would have to be several hundred feet across.

Something is not right in either case.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 09:46 PM
link   
joepits says:

"OK. Well lets say I was fooled and they are really 30,000 feet high. In that case they would be extremely wide and that one in the last few pics would have to be several hundred feet across."

Actually they could be several thousand feet across. If the temperature is below -40 deg and the humidity is saturated, then quite often the contrail ice crystals (which are only about ten feet across when they exit the aircraft engine) will act as "seed crystals" which will cause the supersaturated water vapor in the adjacent areas to crystallize, and it can keep going in a chain reaction for a long time, getting wider and wider as more vapor turns to ice.

Now some people will say, "well, if that's true, what's to stop contrails (or "chem-trails", if you will) to turn into clouds and cover up the whole sky?"

And the answer is that that's quite often exactly what they do. Cirrus clouds are almost always ice crystals, and they grow (without aircraft engine exhaust) as a few ice crystals "seed" the surrounding area. Aircraft contrails just speed up the process by acting as a catalyst for cirrus cloud formation.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I'm well over fifty and can recall the days of the B-36 that flew at about 30.000 ft. give or take. Not all of them left CONTRAILS it depended on humidity and a bunch of other factors. WIth a Cheapie Telescope well greased and a much steadier hand than I have now I followed them from horizon to horizon I can also recall the B47, B58, And oh yes the B52 they all made them and like i say they did'nt always have to make them but you could see them just a tiny silver sliver in the sky. Now If one of you could tell me what it was i saw in the Arizona sky about 4 years ago i would appreciate it the object was way way up there my 1600 MM lens could just barely make out a shape but ot put out a contrail that looked like moris code Not Donuts on a rope but distinct dots and dashes. and then it hauled but out of there I couldn't keep up with it.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldSquid
I'm well over fifty and can recall the days of the B-36 that flew at about 30.000 ft. give or take. Not all of them left CONTRAILS it depended on humidity and a bunch of other factors. WIth a Cheapie Telescope well greased and a much steadier hand than I have now I followed them from horizon to horizon I can also recall the B47, B58, And oh yes the B52 they all made them and like i say they did'nt always have to make them but you could see them just a tiny silver sliver in the sky. Now If one of you could tell me what it was i saw in the Arizona sky about 4 years ago i would appreciate it the object was way way up there my 1600 MM lens could just barely make out a shape but ot put out a contrail that looked like moris code Not Donuts on a rope but distinct dots and dashes. and then it hauled but out of there I couldn't keep up with it.


Well for one thing, todays jet engine is much more efficient at turning fuel into water, thus they produce much more water vapor then unburnt fuel as in the "old days." as for the dot dash pattern, the upper atmosphere is a fairly turbulent place.

so you remember everything about what a B-36 looked like when it flew overhead when you were 10 years old, huh (the B-36 was retired in 1959, 46 years ago. )


If you are really as old as you claim to be, then you should be familiar with the term "buttermilk sky."



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join