This is not a chemtrail! Atmospheric Phenomenen explained

reply to post by StellarX

---

Stellar, I wrote the word 'concise' at the end, and I meant to write 'precise', sorry for the confusion.

Contrails in WWII? Well, that sorta proves my point, doesn't it?

Allied bombers, although obviously piston powered, still produced hot exhaust plumes that could make contrails form....and, the bombers flew at very high altitudes, (to avoid flak) certainly not at altitudes above 30,000 feet, but up as high as 25,000 or 26,000, if memory serves...I'll have to look that up...and, of course, the crew used supplemental oxygen up there, since the partial pressure of O2 is insufficient to maintain consciousness without it.

Sorry for the confusion about the word 'concise'....

WW

Interesting thread.

Here's my take on chemtrails. I agree with the OP, I think what many people think are chemtrails and the government trying to control the weather or people, are really just natural occurances. Myself and I'm sure a lot of other people think this too, is that we just don't have enough knowledge about contrails to make a conclusion about this.

After studying and researching this phenenomena for quite some time I have come to the conclusion that what ever is going on is such a high level of secrecy that we can go round and round for ever and never reach a conclusion.

I believe it is such high level of National Security that the information is not for public consumption and all this internet debate is simply to take the focus off the truth of the matter until the project can no longer be hidden.

All you atmospheric so called experts and commercial pilots are just as blinded to the truth as the rest us.

Time will tell and then there will be no more foolery.

Just because you are meterologist and pilots don't mean a thing except you know how to do your job. And that is it, bottom line.

If you are so niave' to believe secrets aren't kept from you then you are really living in a dream.

After studying and researching this phenenomena for quite some time I have come to the conclusion that what ever is going on is such a high level of secrecy that we can go round and round for ever and never reach a conclusion.

I believe it is such high level of National Security that the information is not for public consumption and all this internet debate is simply to take the focus off the truth of the matter until the project can no longer be hidden.

All you atmospheric so called experts and commercial pilots are just as blinded to the truth as the rest us.

Time will tell and then there will be no more foolery.

Just because you are meterologist and pilots don't mean a thing except you know how to do your job. And that is it, bottom line.

If you are so niave' to believe secrets aren't kept from you then you are really living in a dream.

reply to post by interestedalways

---

Interested, I can only reply to one of your posts, so I chose the 'dupe' post....

I think I've already answered this from you...

I'm slightly offended by your use of the term 'so-called', as you refer to me, a pilot, and to others who are meteoroligists, if I may speak for them.

One more time, I will try to explain, from the point of view of an airline pilot. It is IMPOSSIBLE to equip commercial passenger jets with apparatus that spray htese alleged chemtrails without it being common knowledge of every commercial passenger jet pilot in the USA, or the World, for that matter.

Commercial airline pilots know every aspect of the airplanes we fly, we know every antenna, every hole, every protuberance on the airplane...we conduct a walk-around before EVERY flight, as does a Maintenance professional as well.

We know the internal layout of the airplane, we know all the switches in the cockpit, and what they control. We KNOW there are no 'hidden' tanks, nor 'secret' nozzles on the jets, because if there were, we would SEE them!!!

What's more, an alleged 'tank' of chemicals has weight, just as fuel has weight, and passengers and baggage has weight....all weight is accounted for, before dispatch, and is calculated into our 'actual' weight for taxi and take-off purposes. A modern commercial jet has a maximum 'Ramp-Weight' and a maximum 'Take-Off Weight' and a maximum 'Landing Weight'.

If payload and stage length requirements are tight, a jet can leave the gate at it MAX 'Ramp Weight', with the anticipation that about 500 to 800 pounds of fuel will be burned during the taxi to take-off, so as to arrive at the runway, ready for take-off, at MAX Take-Off weight.

BTW, the MAX T/O weight will always be limited by the manufacturer's MAXIMUM structual limit, but may be reduced by: Altitude of the airport, prevailing temperature, runway slope, runway length, and obstacles in the departure path, which have influence in what's called 'second segment climb' standards.....wind can be factored in, but not very much usually, unless we really need it to be legal....LOL! Also, we usually assume a 'wet' runway (since stopping distance can be impaired in case of a rejection) even if the runway is dry...it's a safety margin built-in.

Point is, a 'chemical' tank on our airplane would weigh thousands of pounds....hint: Water weighs 7 lbs/gal. Jet fuel 6.7 lbs/gal.

Which is heavier? Jet fuel, or a chemical that is likely in a water medium???? Oh, and a typical four-hour flight will need about (minimum estimate) 32,000 lbs of jet fuel, for two engines, at 3,000 lbs/hour each, and allowing for some reserves at destination.... so, how much you think a 'chemical' tank would weigh, hmmmmm?????

Thanks for thinking, WW

For the last time no one is implying that commercial planes are involved in the things we are observing in the sky.

Get over yourself.

Edit to add, you have established a pattern of using to many words which make your posts nothing but confusion.

Say what you feel you need to say, but by being overly wordy the point (if there is one) is lost in the overkill.


By the way did you join this site just to argue about the trails?

You are simply a commercial pilot, you aren't privy to any secrets. Sheez, lots of pilots just fly drunk and hit on stewerdesses.



[edit on 31-3-2008 by interestedalways]

But nearly all the persistent contrails which people claim to be chemtrails are made by commercial aircraft on route flights .....

reply to post by interestedalways

---

Oh, interested! How mean of you, when all I wish to do is educate. Sometimes it can't be done in a few simple sentences.....

BTW, all pilots do is 'hit on stewardesses'?? THAT is sexist, and probably against the T&Cs...you know that they are called 'Flight Attendants' now!!

To imply that they are anything less is insulting.

You are a master twister of words throughout all your posts.

My statement that "lots of pilots" was conveniently changed by you to "all Pilots."

Then you make the stretch to insinuate that I should be reprimanded through the T&C by making sexist remarks because I call the attendants of airflights Stewerdasses!

You really have issues.

There has been a wealth a treasure trove of information to at least make our legal representatives look into what is happening and yet you play your little word games and talk about Natural Contrails being the beginnng and the end of this issue.

Maybe you should do some serious reading that goes against your single minded belief system that you call scientific facts.

I only come back to this thread because you seem to have made it your personal agenda to make me look like a "nut case" and such.'

Well, dear, It isn't working, at least for those who think and research for themselves.

reply to post by interestedalways

---

yeah, interested, I don't have a photographic memory, so when I reply to a post I tend to paraphrase from what I remember.

Sorry you're so touchy about semantics, maybe it would be a good idea to re-read what I write, and realize that in MY posts I don't resort to name-calling, or vieled inferences, I just state the facts.

AND, being human, I can sometimes react with emotion, when I see something said about me that instills emotion.

I apologize for letting emotions show, however mild they may have been.

Ok, guys lets stop this arguing and get back on topic.

Still haven't heard and decent evidence that spraying is actually occuring. No one has yet proven that contrails dont last long all of the time and no one has yet answered why spraying chemicals thousands of feet up in the air is more reliable than posioning/putting mind controlling stuff etc into a water supply

Sigh

I was explaining that it does change, and other meteorologists agree. Excess moisture from the exhaust of airplanes is injected into the atmosphere, therefore changing the water content (theres a change right there, that isnt a massive intervention) helping it to become supersaturated thus forming cirrus cloud.

Water vapour can exist on a clear day, there doesn't have to be cirrus clouds already present to form contrails. The ice crystals may be to small and too widely spread to be visible. Your theories are flawed even though some of the information you provided is good. And it is weird how the info is supporting contrails yet you are not.....

Maybe I didnt explain properly or maybe you just didnt read properly

Ok, what about today, I was watching the planes , and the spray, then it just stops, but the plane is still going. A normal contrail does not start, then just stop as the plane is flying. Then another plane comes along next to it and stops spraying near the same spot.

Ama

Thats because the plane has moved into a dryer air parcel where supersaturaton can't happen, therefore there is less moisture in the air so the water vapour in the jet exhaust wont expand the ice crystals enough to make them become visible. Whether it was just further along or it changed elevation, there was not enough water vapour in the air at that point. Its been explained before and there are a number of factors including mositure and wind speed that affect this.

reply to post by interestedalways

---

Bit off topic here, but using many words doesn't mean you are trying to confus somebody. using many words means you are trying to get your point across as directly as possible. I know it means you have more to read. but don't dismiss the entire thing.

Other than that, Kudos Oz for keeping level headed so far. I think you'd have been better off not trying this though, when someone makes up their mind here, it seems to stick.

Thanks Rune

Yeah but at least with threads like these, people that are new to ATS or neutral here get to see both sides of the argument, rather than having the same old "the government is spraying chemicals" down their throat. There are two sides to every thread here and this is the other side of the chemtrail thing. Thats why I post these

reply to post by OzWeatherman

---

Well, great job, as always Oz!

Seems the point of this thread has been hammered in, great to see some opinions were influenced!

Always good to deny ignorance...but that has a negative connotation.

How about, spread knowledge? Yeah, much better!

Someday, mate, hope to visit Darwin...until then, cheers!

WW

Weedwhacker, what is a DUPE post???

I will apologize for my remark about pilots drinking and hitting on stewardesses, that was petty and has nothing to do with the thread.

They are spraying the grids over me today, YUKK!!!

reply to post by interestedalways

---

interested, a 'DUPE' post is when, inexplicably, you post to the ATS website, and your post gets repeated for one or two times. No fault of your own, I think, just a 'glitch' that happens in the system.

As when, we type, yet things get misspelled...

At this point, am I the only one who is noticing the weird thing happening in the date part of our date? I mean, when we signed on?

Hope I'm not the only one to notice...

WW

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

Explain these Government DOCUMENTS admitting chemtrail testing.

The Government documents even use the word CHEMTRAIL!

Here's your proof FOR chemtrails, now show me some against them!!
Local News Investigates Chem-trails