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 Photo, WOW!!!!

page: 8
18
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity

To add to my previous point. The place I played golf(Okeeheelee) is right in the taxi lane to WPB airport. Had about 30 jets fly overhead while playing. No contrails from any of them. The chemtrail plane was flying on a line almost exactly perpendicular to the jet traffic. All lines were north- south. Except for one which looked more like the angle of a rocket launch. Even that trail eventually leveled out, and ended up being north-south. Guess he was playing the wind, which had picked up by this time.


Low flying jets do not normally make contrails. Was this plane that you saw the trails from higher than the ones on approach to the airport? Because of the airspace around an airport is restricted to only allowing traffic coming and going to the airport, so to fly over it you need to be high up out of the airports airspace, and so you can get contrails in that case.




[edit on 22-9-2007 by Xtrozero]




posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity

I don't know where you lived in Florida, but I see these things at least once a week. The planes laying them are always flying parallel to the prevailing wind direction, which today was coming from the East. Thus planes landing and taking off today fly towards the east and not north - south.


Just thought you should know, the winds near ground level and the wind high above do not always blow the same direction, nor are they the same speed. At least that's what I can recall.

Essan, can you confirm?



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Essan --

There are too many words in that study
...

...It's easier to blame it on some kind of government conspiracy than attempt to understand what's in that report




[edit on 9/22/2007 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
Part of the problem with why people buy into the Chemtrail theory is that they think to locally. You always hear folks say, “well I live out in the middle of nowhere so why are there flights going over my house all of the sudden?” Folks just don’t seem to realize that even though there may not be an airport for hundreds of miles in all directions, that they may still be in the flight path of a series of aircraft making transcontinental flights of thousands of miles. I have often heard this from folks who live out west somewhere, but they fail to realize that they have places like Los Vegas, and California that the aircraft are heading to when they fly over their homes.


I've just got to quote you on that. That there, star material. Good job!



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Just thought you should know, the winds near ground level and the wind high above do not always blow the same direction, nor are they the same speed. At least that's what I can recall.

Essan, can you confirm?


Yes. You will often notice that clouds are moving in a different direction to the winds at ground level. At altitude they're often much faster too - calm at sea level yet severe gales at just 4,000ft on some occasions.

It's a phenomena known to sailors for hundreds of years and commonly used in weather forecasting

More info: www.theweatherprediction.com...

(Note: by 700 millibars we mean the altitude at which pressure is 700mb. At sea level it's usually around 1000mb, reducing with altiitude)



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Seems like the absence of proof will keep this discussion going into eternity. Perhaps this could be debunked if someone could come up with a video of something like a 747, 737 laying PERSISTENT contrails while flying at high altitude. I personally do not think such video exist. Prove me wrong.


shd

posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Defcon5 the cloud you have posted looks like a noctilucent cloud, it is often seen just after sunset or before sunrise it means 'Night Shining' i did have several pictures of them while i was during my stargazing time. I lost them in one of my moves


Source: LiveScience.com
[Edited to add pic]
[Edited again opps forgot to put the source]

[edit on 23-9-2007 by shd]

[edit on 23-9-2007 by shd]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by shd
 


I have heard of those, but I think they mainly exist around the poles at this point. I was just posting what the experts said that the cloud was in the photo. The concept is still somewhat the same though, its light refracting through particles. I think the main difference with the Noctilucent Clouds is that they are at such a high altitude that the sun can continue to strike them well after its gone over the horizon.


shd

posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 08:00 AM
link   
That sounds about right, though that pic was taken in hungary and i saw one in Lincoln,UK



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Yes noctilucent clouds are most commonly seen in the arctic, but can be seen at lower latitudes in summer - there's been quite a few sighting from the UK, especially during summer 2006.

Sadly not seen them myself yet


It's still unknown exactly why they form and why they appear to be increasing in frequency - inevitably global warming as been invoked as a possible cause, and I think some form of change in atmospheric composition due to human activity may well be involved.

(That's a stunning photo of them btw
)



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
It's still unknown exactly why they form and why they appear to be increasing in frequency - inevitably global warming as been invoked as a possible cause, and I think some form of change in atmospheric composition due to human activity may well be involved.


How interesting that your above comment, after debating on whether chemtrails are real or are just contrails made into a conspiracy theory, you actually admit that these strange clouds may be "some form of change in atmospheric composition due to HUMAN activity may well be involved." Is this your cleverly crafted way of saying "chemtrails are real, but i'm disinfo so I can't let others know that they are real?"

Obviously, by admission from your own mouth, you think the composition of the atmosphere is changing. And that humans may be involved. Why is it then not possible in your mind that chemtrails are the cause, or partly to cause for your admitted change in atmosphere?

For those of you who just started reading this thread, I would like to point out that there is much disinfo being used in this thread. The disinformation agents are using a technique called The Delphi Technique. Please go to this site and read about it so that you can recognize it more clearly when it is being used in the ATS forum, which is quite often.

www.premier1.net...

Isn't it interesting how a self proclaimed "US Govt. Disinformation Agent" goes through and creates doubt as to whether chemtrails are real or not and then in the LAST statement he makes, he clearly admits that human intervention is the possible cause for the change in the atmosphere.

This is tell tell sign that these forums do expose many truths. And although many of these truths can not be "proven" does not change the fact that they are happening. I am all for denying ignorance, but could it be that this site was really created so that it would be easier to "deny truth" for those, who don't wish it to be known?



[edit on 7-10-2007 by sir_chan]



posted on Oct, 6 2007 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chan

Originally posted by Essan
It's still unknown exactly why they form and why they appear to be increasing in frequency - inevitably global warming as been invoked as a possible cause, and I think some form of change in atmospheric composition due to human activity may well be involved.


How interesting that your above comment, after debating on whether chemtrails are real or are just contrails made into a conspiracy theory, you actually admit that these strange clouds may be "some form of change in atmospheric composition due to HUMAN activity may well be involved." Is this your cleverly crafted way of saying "chemtrails are real, but i'm disinfo so I can't let others know that they are real."

Obviously, by admission from your own mouth, you think the composition of the atmosphere is changing. And that humans may be involved. Why is it then not possible in your mind that chemtrails are the cause, or partly to cause for your admitted change in atmosphere?


Seems like a case of interpreting what you want there. Also a case of quoting out of context since he was talking about noctilucent clouds. Human activity in this case, I'm pretty sure is simply pollution. Not aircraft spraying chemicals high up in the stratosphere.

But whatever floats your boat.



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Seems like a case of interpreting what you want there. Also a case of quoting out of context since he was talking about noctilucent clouds. Human activity in this case, I'm pretty sure is simply pollution. Not aircraft spraying chemicals high up in the stratosphere.

But whatever floats your boat.


First off, can you prove those noctilucent clouds are from pollution? NO. No more than I can prove they are residue from chemtrails. I have noticed you and him work well together. In fact I now see you even speak for him. How kind of you. But the fact that you cannot disprove chemtrails, anymore than I can prove them, floats my boat just fine.

I mean really, can anything on this site be totally "proven"???
And...If it can, PROVE IT!!!



[edit on 7-10-2007 by sir_chan]



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chan
"chemtrails are real, but i'm disinfo so I can't let others know that they are real."
The disinformation agents are using a technique called The Delphi Technique.

This statement tells me everything I need to know about you as a poster.
Once your argument failed and was proven to be a load of nonsense, you wait a month to get the last word, and then call someone who has been on this site a lot longer then you, a disinfo agent because they disproved your theory. None of us are disinfo agents, but you have heard from several people with aviation experience, and meteorological backgrounds.

The government has yet to send me a dime for anything I have ever posted on this site, and I currently work in the medical field. However your intent was obvious, as I said you wait a month figuring that we lost track of this thread, then come back to post your rebuttal thinking you’ll get the last word and we wont respond, making it appear that your accusation was true. Very poor form…



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by sir_chan
 


We can prove noctilucent clouds are not residue from chemtrails because the first known sightings of them occured in the 1880's (shortly after the krakatoa eruption) which is a long time before the first planes were ever up in the air. So you should do a little more research before answer next time.

Is that enough proof for you?



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chan
First off, can you prove those noctilucent clouds are from pollution? NO. No more than I can prove they are residue from chemtrails. I have noticed you and him work well together. In fact I now see you even speak for him. How kind of you. But the fact that you cannot disprove chemtrails, anymore than I can prove them, floats my boat just fine.


No one knows exactly what creates Noctilucent Clouds at this time but there have been several theories I have read. They involve everything from the increased space dust that has entered our solar system, to gasses released from the thawing of permafrost in the arctic regions due to global warming. One thing that we know for sure about them is that they are not related to aircraft in anyway…

How do we know this?
Because until recently these clouds have only existed in the Polar Regions, and for more then half of the year it’s too cold to operate aircraft in those areas. If you remember correctly, the aircrew that help the lady with cancer at McMurdo Station, had to be chosen as volunteers for a high risk mission to drop supplies, and I believe they received commendations for making those two flights. It is so cold down there for 8 months of the year that aircraft can literally have their fluids freeze mid flight.

Next Theory???



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


You missed a couple of theories there to. I think the first occasion when they were witnessed was due to the volcanic ash from the krakatoa eruption (which is a good sign that it may well be pollution) and also space shuttle exhaust



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


I am not a meteorologist; I leave that to folks like you or Essan. I just know that I read an article which was saying it could be space dust, which is increasing for some reason, that was possibly entering the upper atmosphere where these clouds form, or that it could be methane and other gasses being released from permafrost thaw. Beyond that, and that these clouds are now moving to the more temperate regions, I know very little about them. One thing is for certain though, they exist at the very edge of our atmosphere, WAY above where any conventional aircraft fly.


[edit on 10/7/2007 by defcon5]



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by sir_chan
"chemtrails are real, but i'm disinfo so I can't let others know that they are real."
The disinformation agents are using a technique called The Delphi Technique.

This statement tells me everything I need to know about you as a poster.
Once your argument failed and was proven to be a load of nonsense, you wait a month to get the last word, and then call someone who has been on this site a lot longer then you, a disinfo agent because they disproved your theory. None of us are disinfo agents, but you have heard from several people with aviation experience, and meteorological backgrounds.

The government has yet to send me a dime for anything I have ever posted on this site, and I currently work in the medical field. However your intent was obvious, as I said you wait a month figuring that we lost track of this thread, then come back to post your rebuttal thinking you’ll get the last word and we wont respond, making it appear that your accusation was true. Very poor form…



I was actually hoping you would respond. The reason it took so long was merely to see who would actually make sure to post the last statements and I see it was you three 90% of the time, babbling about zip on contrail or chemtrail. YOU are the one who was HOPING i had just lost interest because you guys were teaming up(delphi technique).

Poor form is quoting me OUT of context. It was a question NOT a statement.

Poor form is exaggerating excessively. Look at the dates. A month??? Do you have a calendar handy???

Do i need aviation experience or meteorological background to know I see two very distinct differences in the types of trails left by aircraft? And that they dissipate quite differently? NO!

But if you want to keep using juvenile tactics at trying to make me look bad to other posters, it's your time...

Have fun trying to disprove my opinion.



posted on Oct, 7 2007 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by sir_chan
 


Well lets see...
Essan lives in the UK, and has not responded to this thread yet because its like 04:00am there right now.
I happen to work the night shift and am normally up at this time of night.
Beachcomber, I believe is younger, and certainly not a government agent.
OzWeatherman apparently lives in Australia, and is a newer member.

So exactly what government is it that we all disinform for?
To be honest I don’t see the same three people in this thread that I see in most chemtrail threads. The funniest part is that all the folks who are against this theory are mostly ex aviation people, or climatologists of some type. I have never seen a single person from either of those groups which professionally deal with aircraft and the atmosphere, who supports the Chemtrail Hoax.


[edit on 10/7/2007 by defcon5]



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join