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.
Originally posted by Directive51 we have been manipulating the weather in sinister fashion confirmed as early as the 1950's, so who's to say the idea of releasing chemical's from aircraft wasnt thought of even earlier?
Originally posted by Directive51 It's pretty undisputed that contrails cant form below 25,000ft (so when your looking at that fat puffy cloud forming what seems to be right over your house it makes you wonder)
Originally posted by Directive51 your standard contrail forms at wingspan length from behind the engine as it takes time for the ice to flash freeze (so when you see the videos of contrails seemingly spewing directly from the surface of the aircraft and stop starting at same altitudes it makes you wonder)
Originally posted by defcon5
Pre-1980’s persistent contrails:
Persistent contrails visible from B-52, X-15, and chase planes during the 1950’s-1960’s. Watch at 00:34, 02:32-02:53, 03:06-03:20, and very good shot of B-52 at 05:10-05:15:
The X-1 breaking the sound barrier and leaving a persistent contrail at 02:50-03:04. Herbert Hoover NACA pilot in X1 at 03:38-03:39. The stiletto at 07:12-07:19:
One unique type of cloud is manmade. Contrails occur when exhaust from jet engines condenses. A narrow line of moisture makes up the contrail. Winds eventually dissipate it; in some instances conditions permit the contrail to survive for many minutes (their straight lines do distort). Contrails are believed to affect weather by raising both short and long-term temperatures (one estimate is for about a third of a degree per decade). Here is a MODIS image taken over the southeast U.S. on January 29, 2004 showing a large number of contrails (at times more than 2000 planes are over the North American continent at any one time):
rst.gsfc.nasa.gov...
The condensation trails (contrails) that form in the wake of high-flying jets are another interesting example. These cylindrical clouds have variable lifetimes and water concentrations depending on environmental conditions. In some cases the contrails can persist for many minutes. But they do slowly diffuse, much like the smoke plume emitted by an acrobatic aircraft
www.sciam.com...
Like natural cirrus clouds, contrails can impact
climate through their radiative effects. Persistent
contrails often form in air with relative humidities with
respect to ice (RHI) exceeding 100% but with relative
humidities with respect to water (RH) less than 100%.
Cirrus cloud formation generally requires RH > 100%.
Thus, contrails can form clouds in conditions that would
not support the formation of most natural cirrus. Cirrus
coverage over the USA grew by 0.010/decade between
1971 and 1996, while declining over other land areas
with minimal air traffic 0.017/decade.
The values of RHI at 225 hPa (~12 km) plotted in
Fig. 4 show one supersaturated area over central OH
and Indiana at 1200 UTC and no areas at 1600 UTC.
Over PA, RHI ranges from 90% at the OH border to
50% at the eastern PA border. Over Pittsburgh (PIT)
underneath contrail A at 1200 UTC, the RUC RHI is
80%, while near Aberdeen, MD (ABD), close to C at
1200 UTC, RHI = 55%. A similar value is found over
Dulles, VA (IAD) near contrail D, while RHI = 80% over
Blacksburg, VA (BLK) near the end of E. These values
are too low for sustaining contrails. To determine if
these values are due to the model assimilation process,
the rawinsonde RHI profiles are compared with the
corresponding RUC values at 1200 UTC. in Fig. 5. The
RUC increased RHI at most levels over BLK and PIT
while smoothing or decreasing RHI over ABD and IAD.
No contrails were observed for RHI < 55%.
None of the soundings show RHI > 72%, despite
the fact that the PIT rawinsonde must have passed
through contrail A on its way to the stratosphere. To
support a persistent contrail, the maximum PIT RHI from
the sonde would need to be increased by 35% or more.
Another sounding taken over western OH yielded RHI =
117% at 225 hPa. Natural cirrus clouds were passing
over the Wilmington, OH station at the time. Because it
is theorized that natural cirrus clouds can only form
adiabatically for RHI exceeding 145% or more (Sassen
and Dodd 1989), the dry bias appears to be consistent
in both clear and cloudy skies. To account for the dry
bias, a correction formula was developed by assuming
that most of contrails observed by Sassen (1997; his
Fig. 5b) should have occurred only in supersaturated
conditions. To include most of his contrail observations
above a new line representing RHI = 100%, it is
necessary to specify that RHI = 100% for the sonde
value of RH = 16% at -70°C and RHI = 100% at RH =
72% and -36°C.
www-pm.larc.nasa.gov...
Originally posted by StellarX
And isn't contrails lasting 'many minutes' what we should expect to see on the few days that atmospheric conditions allows? What is so special about a few pictures of B-29's with contrails stretching out a few tens of miles behind them?
"Six of our wing men went home when they became separated from us. We left England on our own and headed across France for Strassbourg. The contrails were dense, persistent - really hard to even see our own squadron. Our Air Leader really got worried about us being by ourselves. Jack and I had to argue like the devil before he saw the light on the bomb run"
Pilot 487th Bomber group
Originally posted by StellarX
If by persistent you mean 'a few minutes' then no one is arguing but if you want to suggest that they should naturally last for hours or days you are at least disagreeing with whichever 'experts' made the following remarks:
Contrails were so thick that they became clouds. We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. We flew a different route coming back than going in partly to avoid the contrail clouds that we created.
Willard Reese- 457th Bomb Group
Originally posted by StellarX
If by persistent you mean 'a few minutes' then no one is arguing but if you want to suggest that they should naturally last for hours or days you are at least disagreeing with whichever 'experts' made the following remarks:
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Beefcake
Beef, you don't know anything!
Firstly, you attacked another ATS member's credibility, that's bad enough, then you announce that 3700 airplanes were grounded!!!!
Your incredible lack of knowledge is only as large as your arrogance to think you know something that tens of thousands of hard-working airline employees don't know?
Really, junk on the 'Interweb' is just that, mostly junk. Do some independent study and stop listening to morons on the Web.
WW
Your entitled to your opinion but lighten up. I happen to believe what I see with my own to eyes and I noticed that the planes where spraying chemicals in the sky and I also have many pictures to prove this. I even called the EPA myself and the representative on the phone told me that they were indeed "chemtrails" and not contrails.
Originally posted by Gerizo
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Beefcake
Your entitled to your opinion but lighten up. I happen to believe what I see with my own to eyes and I noticed that the planes where spraying chemicals in the sky and I also have many pictures to prove this. I even called the EPA myself and the representative on the phone told me that they were indeed "chemtrails" and not contrails.
Originally posted by Beefcake think that Defcon 5 is way to prepared for this thread its almost comical all the info he has and it says very little and convinces me of nothing except that contrails exist and i know that already.
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Originally posted by Zeus187
Ouch flame grilled. So what is your opinion on this subject? Why so quick to dismiss?
Well weedwhaker is a pilot and I am a meteorologist. So thats two expert fields that work with or in upper air.
I notice you're new so this is a thread for why the chemtrail thing is unplausible
www.abovetopsecret.com...
You dont have to reply to it but this is the other side of the fence