Chemtrail upscale??? 3700 flights cancelled for "inspection issues"??

Originally posted by Essan
Well, to be honest Stellar, every meteorologist on the planet would agree that those remarks you persist in quoting are inaccurate.

These days many might ( if pressed on the matter they previously had no opinion about) but what does that have to do with what is natural and what is not? If you are willing to conduct a survey as to how many meteorologist spends any fraction of time in a year dealing with or studying contrails be my guests.

Especially those who have been recording and studying persistent contrails over the past few decades and who today are investigating ways to prevent them occurring due to their impact on climate.

Sure and i have half a dozen statements from such investigators that admits that contrails are badly understood even today? Should i post them again or do you still remember them from last time you did not respond to any of those statements?

As to other conspiracy theories - the question is: who is misleading who? And why?

Well i suppose those few in government who are aware are misleading us with the rest just doing their jobs and believing what everyone else seems to be at the time. If you can secretly bomb a country for a few years ( Laos) don't you think our governments have proven more than adept at keeping secrets? What about the savings and loan scandal were rich educated investors cheated other rich investigators out of billions of dollars? Why is it that it's the educated among us who always believe that they cant or wont be taken in? Pride before the fall?

Stellar

[edit on 14-4-2008 by StellarX]

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
You were not attacked. You claimed that the trails above you were CHEMTRAILS. WE asked for your evidence of such great claims. You still have not provided it.

But others have and they are ignored as much as you guys are.

Your pictures show contrails. Contrails absolutely DO stay in the sky for long periods of time.

Contrails do not stay in the sky for long periods of time ; at least they did not use to as atmospheric conditions simply did not allow for that.

Comparisons were made between satellite-identified contrails and contrail persistence estimates from flight data for 53,844 U.S. continental flights performed during the week of November 11/12-18, 2001. The satellite data were processed by NASA Langley Research Center using methods for identifying contrails as described by Mannstein [28]. Given detailed knowledge of the aircraft types and radar-based trajectory data, simulated contrails did not match contrails observed in the satellite images. First, striated cirrus cloud formations were misidentified as contrail pixels. This resulted in the "contrails" typically aligning N-S, while most aircraft routes are aligned E-W. Perhaps 40-50% of the contrail pixels were misidentified. Second, a total of 60-90% of the contrail pixels (all demonstrated to be either contrails or clouds) occurred in areas where the assimilated meteorological fields showed RHi < 100%. This demonstrates that the RHi fields, although representative, do not accurately portray the true RHi fields on a given day in 2001.


www.ifremer.fr...

So plenty of contrails aligned in the opposite directions of where they were expected and even more where atmospheric conditions ( RH too low) does not allow.

Once formed, the contrails were allowed to spread based on wind shear. It was assumed that the
contrails precipitated with a fall speed of 3 cm s-1. This fall speed produced a spreading rate of 6 km
h-1, the same as that determined for the isolated military contrails. Although the isolated contrails
spread to widths as large as 40 km, it was assumed that the maximum width would be 12 km because
it corresponds to the length-weighted average width of the military contrails. No new nucleation
was allowed so that the optical mass (OM) remained constant as the product of the optical
depth (OD) and the width once the OD reached it peak according to the log-normal function,

To persist, contrails and cirrus require RHI > 100%. Because of negative biases in the relative humidity measured at cold temperatures (Miloshevich et al. 1999), RHI infrequently exceeds 100% in
the USA radiosonde record. Furthermore, the RUC model adjusts and smoothes the RHI field so
that it differs from the radiosonde measurements. While the older version of the RUC used here
(discontinued 18 April 2002) yields RHI > 100% more often than the radiosondes, it is still biased
low. Thus, it is necessary to increase the RHI from radiosonde measurements for T < 0°C or set an
artificially low value of RHIt.

www-pm.larc.nasa.gov...

So again i am left with the distinct impression that the 'isolated' military contrails are doing different things than the civilian one's and that the record shows that RH 'infrequently' exceeds 100% which should at least in theory prevent contrails or cirrus cover from forming. As you may surmise from he fact that cirrus does form one may very well just start asking why we believe anything they say given the open confusion that seems to be reigning.

When scientists at Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory started studying contrails for the Air Force and Navy, they found that contrail ice particles are one five-thousandth to two five-thousandths of an inch in diameter. This is small but not small enough. One way to suppress contrails, the scientists reasoned, would be to make their water form particles smaller than a wave length of light. Then they would not reflect light whitely like clouds or snow.

Much of the actual experimental work was done in the Cornell Laboratory's high-altitude chamber. Researchers dressed in Arctic clothing were sealed inside while much of the air was pumped out and the remainder chilled as low as—85° F. Then they lit a small blowtorch with jet engine fuel and studied the captive contrail that it created in the cold, thin air.

What they were searching for was a material to feed into the incipient trail and make its water form ice particles too small to reflect light. Hundreds of materials were tried. At last a hygroscopic (water-attracting) powder was found that promised to do the trick and meet practical requirements. The laboratory built a mechanism to shoot it into the exhaust of one engine of a B-47. It reduced the contrail to a thin wisp a few hundred feet long. Later improvements made the trail completely invisible.

www.time.com...

So yes, we can prevent our skies from being polluted in this way.

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.


www-pm.larc.nasa.gov...

Tells me that our atmosphere functions much like it used to and would still produce the same atmospheric phenomenon if left alone. The cloud formations sometimes resulting from chemtrails should not be confused with natural cirrus as natural cirrus has not suddenly become more prevalent than it used to be.

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.

www-pm.larc.nasa.gov...

So that 'contrail' can't persist and yet it does? Do you see where the chemtrail arguments come from when the scientist are suddenly scrambling to explain things that that never had to before?

Espeically when the temps are cold. This is fact. And there are professionals here who have explained this over and over.

There are 'professionals' here who at best think they are more educated and experienced than the 'professionals' i am quoting. Saturation is more important than temperature when it comes to contrail formation.

Thefore, I (and a few others) are actually the one denying your ingorance.

According to you, yes.

Again, can you please provide us with your proof that chemicals were being sprayed above you. Thanks! It will help us all in this long winded debate!

I don't think 'chemicals' are being sprayed on us and if they were aiming for you you probably wouldn't see the chemtrail on in question. Proof matters nothing in this discussion as i have often presented defcon, essan and even the new guy , wheedwacker, with evidence that they simply do not address. Given the stupid arguments some chemtrail believers put forward that's no surprise as it's much easier to attack the obvious nonsense than it is to deal with the more interesting and obvious contradictions in the science.

Stellar

[edit on 14-4-2008 by StellarX]

[edit on 14-4-2008 by StellarX]

Why would the "powers that be" need to use chemtrails to destroy the population.....we are doing a pretty good job of it already......check out all the crap we eat, the drugs we take, the air we breathe, the stress we place on ourselves, the way we polute or own environment, surround ourselves with excessive micro, ectro, and magnetic waves....not to mention radiation.......and now lets talk about war, and weapons and crime, and famine....and.....oh yeah....now we need chemtrails in commercial airliners that are all going broke. .......let me guess...all those luxury sea liners are really behind the melting of the Polar Ice Caps.

Originally posted by 4theye
i think the debunkers here are on a salary. you can show evidence, logical arguments, and proof all day long and they will refute it with all kinds of nonsense to the bitter end of their shift, whence the next shift clocks in to take over damage control. c'est la vie.

And to be fair the regular chemtrail advocate around here rarely bothers with appeals to anything other than either the opinions of others or themselves. If i wanted to make a serious case for chemtrails i most certainly wouldn't call many here as witnesses or for that matter disclose the fact that i am loosely associated with the average chemtrail 'believer'( as that's what it comes down to).

Stellar

According to the original article:

WASHINGTON, April 11 (Xinhua) -- American Airlines, the largest U.S. air carrier, canceled 570 more flights on Friday, or 25 percent of its schedule, leaving tens of thousands of passengers stranded, CNN reported.

The move came after the airline failed twice to meet an airworthiness directive by the Federal Aviation Administration, or FAA.

American Airlines has canceled nearly 2,500 flights in the past three days.

Over the past three weeks, U.S. carriers overall have shut down about 3,700 flights because of inspection issues, with the potential of cancellations continuing into the summer, leading to multi-million-U.S.-dollar daily losses, according to industry analysts.

Which directive is it about anyway? does it even have anything to do with exterior aspects of the aircraft? It doesn't actually say. For all it says, they could just be inspecting the rudders, maybe the flight deck instruments, the avionics, the wiring, the engine fan blades, the engine fan disc, the hydraulic lines, the pressure bulkheads, the inflight entertainment system etc. The list of systems vital for the safety of the aircraft is huge, and they all need inspecting at one time or the other. In fact, all I mentioned have at least once caused a hull loss accident, possibly with the loss of everyone on board (yes, even the entertainment system, that extra electronics gets hot!).

For example

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 737-600, 737-700, 737-700C, 737-800, and 737-900 series airplanes. This AD requires an inspection of the vertical fin lugs, skin, and skin edges for discrepancies; an inspection of the flight control cables, fittings, and pulleys in section 48 for signs of corrosion; an inspection of the horizontal stabilizer jackscrew, ball nut, and gimbal pins for signs of corrosion; and corrective actions if necessary. This AD results from reports indicating that moisture was found within the section 48 cavity. We are issuing this AD to ensure that the correct amount of sealant was applied around the vertical fin lugs, skin and the skin edges. Missing sealant could result in icing of the elevator cables, which could cause a system jam and corrosion of structural and flight control parts, resulting in reduced controllability of the airplane.

Effective 8 April 2008

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 747-100, -100B, -100B SUD, -200B, -200C, -200F, -300, 747SP, and 747SR series airplanes powered by General Electric (GE) CF6- 45/50 and Pratt & Whitney (P&W) JT9D-70, JT9D-3, or JT9D-7 series engines. This AD requires repetitive inspections to find cracks and broken fasteners of the rear engine mount bulkhead of the inboard and outboard nacelle struts, and repair if necessary. For certain airplanes, this AD mandates a terminating modification for certain inspections of the inboard and outboard nacelle struts. This AD results from reports of web and frame cracks and sheared attachment fasteners on the inboard and outboard nacelle struts. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks and broken fasteners of the inboard and outboard nacelle struts, which could result in possible loss of the rear engine mount bulkhead load path and consequent separation of the engine from the airplane.

Effective 8 April 2008

Source
And believe me, you don;t want to be on a plane that loses an engine, thats never good. For one thing, the pilots likely would not know the engine has come off, just think it's failed.

So why exactly would it necessarily be to make more supposed 'chemtrails'? And why would said chemicals be inserted into the airflow in the hot jet exhaust anyway, since thats where the contrails form from?

[edit on 14-4-2008 by apex]

Originally posted by atlasastro
Why would the "powers that be" need to use chemtrails to destroy the population.....we are doing a pretty good job of it already......

And yet the world population keeps increasing with the democratic struggle generally achieving consistent small victories.

check out all the crap we eat,

And yet we live longer...

the drugs we take, the air we breathe,

The air quality in the average city is much better than it used to be just a hundred years ago and as for the side effects of the drugs we take that can normally be taken in stride given a proper nutritious diet which after all IS something one can achieve with some effort.

the stress we place on ourselves,

To be competitive in our so called 'free market' economies ( which are neither free nor have much to do with the market) we have to test ourselves and while the pace generally takes a toll we are living longer with at least the same resource security as before.

the way we polute or own environment,

'We' do not but we do not seem to be very efficient at preventing large corporate structures from doing so.

surround ourselves with excessive micro, ectro, and magnetic waves....

Excessive according to who? Would you rather bath in magnetic and electric rays or chop down trees to make fire for heat and protection against predators? Good luck with that.

not to mention radiation.......

Normal background radiation are in many populated locations around the world hundreds of times higher than our safety margins for nuclear power stations and environmental fallout. In fact i have seen what i consider good evidence that low doses of radiation ( in excess of a natural world background radiation average) increases the immune function of the body thus increasing health for a slight increase of energy usage.

and now lets talk about war, and weapons and crime, and famine....and.....oh yeah....

All perfectly good capitalistic enterprises that yields vast profits for some while leaving the average member of the human society quite depressed and desperate not to become a victim himself.

now we need chemtrails in commercial airliners that are all going broke.

Well many major airliners had to be bailed out at great cost to the taxpayers of the world but maybe the various governments used the opportunity to force such spraying on at least a certain percentage of various fleets? I don't know but i know that despite giving away other peoples money those in power do their best to still buy what they want.

.......let me guess...all those luxury sea liners are really behind the melting of the Polar Ice Caps.

Interesting theory. I think we could more legitimately blame the USN and sonar related equipment but i suppose i can consider regular luxury liners if you wish to insist.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX

Contrails do not stay in the sky for long periods of time ; at least they did not use to as atmospheric conditions simply did not allow for that.

So all the persistent contrails observed, photographed and studied in the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70-s were what? Figments of imagination?

Of course contrails do stay in the sky for long periods of time and always have done so.

contrailscience.com...

ams.allenpress.com...

So plenty of contrails aligned in the opposite directions of where they were expected and even more where atmospheric conditions ( RH too low) does not allow.

No, simply a case of a computer simulation failing to reproduce actual observations.

The fact that we are still studying how and why contrails form and persist (mainly nowadays due to concerns over GW, although there is also - naturally - military interest as well) and the fact that computer simulations cannot yet accurately replicate observations, does not in any way mean that such persistent contrails did not exist in the past nor that current contrails are anything but contrails. Any more so than the fact we're still trying to lean how and why tornadoes form makes them anything other than a natural phenomena.


Thus the enigma remains: so-called chemtrails look and behave exactly the same as normal contrails as observed and studied for over half a century.

My conclusion is that if it looks and acts like a contrail, it probably is a contrail. If you want to prove chemtrails you need to look elsewhere .....

[edit on 14-4-2008 by Essan]

www.youtube.com...

alex jones the endgame dude... on chemtrails recently

hes a touch full on for my liking but that part about the young kids at school getting taught "its sunscreen for the planet" if it is in text books as he suggests than that should be easy enough to look into...

Originally posted by apex
So why exactly would it necessarily be to make more supposed 'chemtrails'? And why would said chemicals be inserted into the airflow in the hot jet exhaust anyway, since thats where the contrails form from?

Because it's best to put the stuff in the fuel for efficient dispersal?

Probably the best-known of the aerial geoengineering proposals was that put forward in 1997 by Edward Teller and entitled ‘Global Warming and the Ice Ages: Prospects for Physics-Based Modulation of Global Change’ subsequently popularised in the Wall Street Journal in an article entitled ‘The Planet Needs a Sunscreen’.

Teller proposed deliberate, large-scale introduction of reflective particles into the upper atmosphere, a task he claimed could be achieved for less than $1 billion a year, between 0.1 and 1.0 percent of the $100 billion he estimated it would cost to bring fossil fuel usage in the United States back down to 1990 levels, as required by the Treaty of Kyoto.

Characteristic of the politics of Teller is the fact that he both ridiculed the idea of global warming and at the same time put forward what he represented as a solution to global warming. ‘For some reason,’ Teller observed sarcastically, ‘This option isn't as fashionable as all-out war on fossil fuels and the people who use them.’

www.spectrezine.org...

Both the Pentagon,s aerosol operations and its limited nuclear wars are deeply interconnected. We can trace the beginnings of Operation Cloverleaf right to the Strangelove brain of Dr. Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb and proponent of nuking inhabited coast lines to rearrange them for economic projects.31 Before he died in 2003, Teller was director emeritus of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, where plans for nuclear, biological and directed energy weapons are crafted. In 1997, Teller publicly outlined his proposal to use aircraft to scatter in the stratosphere millions of tons of electrically-conductive metallic materials, ostensibly to reduce global warming.32

Shortly after Teller,s presentation, the public began seeing frenetic chemtrailing. In 2000, CBS News admitted that scientists were "looking at drastic solutions for global warming, including manipulating the atmosphere on a massive scale." CBS confirmed that the plan to load the air with tiny particles would "deflect enough sunlight to trigger global cooling."33

Teller estimated that commercial aircraft could be used to spew these particles at a cost of 33 cents a pound.34 This gives credence to a report by an airline manager, forced by a compulsory non-disclosure agreement to remain anonymous, that commercial aircraft have been co-opted to assist the military in consummating Project Cloverleaf.35 A 1991 Hughes aircraft patent confirms that sunscreen particulate materials can be run through jet engines.36 A science textbook now used in some public schools discusses the sunscreen project by showing a large orange-red jet with the caption, "Jet engines running on richer fuel would add particles to the atmosphere to create a sunscreen." The logo on the plane says "Particle Air."37 The implications of this crucial information should not be understated. A program to make America,s millions of annual jet flights a source of specially designed particulate pollution is serious business.

www.rense.com...

So basically Teller talks about doing this in 1997 which happens to correspond with both the public outcry as well as the changes in air quality and observability standards.

It will be noted that in October of 1997 a change in the reporting system of visibility data was reduced from a former maximum of 40 miles to a limit of 10 miles. It is a reasonable question to ask as to why that change was made, and whether or not it was made in anticipation of certain events to follow that involve large scale aircraft aerosol operations over large scale geographic regions.

It is observed that there are highly significant degradations in the visibility data immediately following this change in the reporting method. Immediately after this change, the dramatic increase in visibility reports of less than 10 miles is quite apparent.

The graphs shown are taken from climatic archive data available for Santa Fe, NM from Jan 1994 to Mar 2001. Three different time periods are shown to aid in demonstrating the magnitude of change which has occurred in visibility. The first graph shows all data available inclusive from Jan 1994 to Mar 2001. The second graph shows the transition zone during which the visibility standards were altered. This graph showns a period from Jan 1996 to Dec 1998; the change in reporting standard was made in Oct 1997. The third graph shows recent data, where visibility below 10 miles is now a regular occurrence. This graph shows the period from Jan 1999 to Mar 2001.

www.carnicom.com...

The proposed revisions address two categories of particulate matter: fine particles (PM2.5), which are 2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller; and inhalable coarse particles (PM10-2.5), which are smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter but larger than PM2.5. EPA has had national air quality standards for fine particles since 1997 and for coarse particles 10 micrometers and smaller (PM10) since 1987

EPA last revised the particulate matter standards in 1997. Under terms of a consent decree, EPA agreed to propose whether to revise the particulate matter standards by December 20, 2005; and committed to finalizing any revisions to the standards by September 27, 2006.

Proposal to Revise the National Ambient Air Quality

Interestingly the US government decides to bail out the airline industry to the tune of fifteen BILLION dollars after three days of not being able to fly after 9/11. Which other industries were 'bailed out' given the 'economic damage' that would result from the terrorist attacks?

'Too generous'

"I think this assistance is too generous, it gives too much money, it goes far beyond compensating the airlines for those three days that government edict was in effect and the question I have is clearly we are compensating them for far more," said Fitzgerald, who like some other Republicans, openly worried that the bill was being passed too fast.

archives.cnn.com...

So what , may i boldly ask, are they being paid for other than being fellow capitalist that can't seem to function in the so called market economy?

So there's a few questions you might wish to address...

Stellar

reply to post by Zeus187


Look no further than ATS

www.abovetopsecret.com...


(Needless to say, if contrails are really chemtrails and chemtrails are intneded to reduce GW they're not doing a very good job and in fact are having the opposite effect. If contrails are chemtrails, then their purpose must be to cause GW ......)


[edit on 14-4-2008 by Essan]

There are no chemtrails! Those aircraft are flying up where the outside air temperature is around -50 degrees! The moisture in the jets' exhaust, which is a byproduct of combustion, instantly freezes and that is what makes the visible trails you see in the sky.

I can't stand threads that have the same guys posting over and over like its a chat group. I believe that chemtrails are real the fact that this thread has garnered so much hostility convinces me even more that they are real.

"Thou dost protest too much, methinks" and where there is smoke there is fire and where there is a trail in the sky that stays there for hours we have us a chemtrail.

I am not a professional researcher on chemtrails because that is silly. What i am most interested in is the same folks that are responding in almost every other post like they have an agenda to dispel the myth of chemtrails or they are just bored

Whether they are dis info or not can't be proven but one thing is for sure when i see the same members posting over and over in a thread i tend to stop reading their posts after a point.

I'm not trying to sway opinions because i don't really care who believes me i'm just giving my 2 cents in 2 posts, not my 50 cents in 50 posts.

Where there is smoke there is fire and there is a fire in this thread for sure.

reply to post by Zeus187


The Tanks you saw were for BALLAST / BALANCE Testing!!!

contrailscience.com...

This was not meant to be a one-liner, but check out your sources!

Originally posted by Beefcake

I'm not trying to sway opinions because i don't really care who believes me i'm just giving my 2 cents in 2 posts, not my 50 cents in 50 posts.

Where there is smoke there is fire and there is a fire in this thread for sure.

The reason some of us keep coming back to these threads is because we have the rather naive and foolish notion that we might be able impart some knowledge and education to those ignorant of the subject.

Suppose you'd been studying a subject for many years. Suppose you'd read dozens of research papers produced by real scientists and published over a period of decades concerning the subject. Suppose someone saw a website saying something about that subject that you knew - from your own studies and from that of those many scientists over the past few decades - was 100% wrong. Suppose that person started a thread on ATS. What would you do?

The question is why are so many people so adamant that meteorologists know nothing about meteorology, but non meteorologists do?

Would you trust someone who didn't know how a car engine works to service your car?


Edit: the irony is, if chemtrails are real then they may be being produced without anyone knowing - because all the attention has been put on contrails.

Disinformation tactic?

[edit on 14-4-2008 by Essan]

Originally posted by Twisted Pair
reply to post by Zeus187

 

The Tanks you saw were for BALLAST / BALANCE Testing!!!

contrailscience.com...

This was not meant to be a one-liner, but check out your sources!

correct me if i am wrong, but i dont recall saying anything about seeing any tanks...

perhaps you should check your "sources" before you go around putting words in the mouths of others

Hey everybody!!! So.. I woke up this morning to the skies over my house being littered with "trails". (Im not too sure yet if I should call them chemtrails or contrails.. either way.. they were there.) So I log in to ATS and see that one of the topics on the main page is "Chemtrail upscale??? 3700 flights cancelled for "inspection issues"??" hmmmm... I have been documenting the recent trail activity over my house since early jan. and honestly.. today was the craziest I've ever seen it up there ever.

This is what it looked like when I woke up at 8 am.. (the sky should have been pure blue..no real clouds in the sky)




The rest are too big to put in the forum.. click on the links







These two were at 8:30







From my research on this topic.. I have come to understand that these trail do not necessarily have to have chemicals in them to be harmful. Persistent spreading contrails are actually a detriment to our environment alone. It's openly discussed on many different government websites. Here is an excerpt from a "count-a-thon" globe.gov was having students do in 2003

"Clouds are the largest variable controlling Earth's atmospheric temperature and climate. Any change in global cloud cover may contribute to long-term changes in Earth's climate. Likewise, any change in Earth's climate may have effects on natural resources. Contrails, especially persistent contrails, represent a human-caused increase in the Earth's cloudiness, and are likely to be affecting climate and ultimately our natural resources.

Student observers can collaborate with scientists by observing contrails in their area and reporting on the amount and type of contrails present. The results could help atmospheric scientists determine the atmospheric conditions when persistent contrails form and thus help them predict where they will form and possibly assist air traffic managers in planning different flight-paths or altitudes to avoid contrail formation.

By participating in this special Earth Day activity you will be able to learn about contrails and clouds, plus help scientists to increase their knowledge of clouds around the world! " www.globe.gov...

Basically.. that right there shows that they know and admit that persistent spreading contrails are very bad for our environment. But from evidence from my photos (and thousands around the world) they are definitely not doing anything to stop the problem and it seems that it has gotten much much worse since 2004. (definitely in my area)

(ran out of room)

One thing that throws off the only water vapor formed persistent spreading contrails theory is that black trails are being seen. I have a contact north of me that has witnessed multiple differnt times a black trail being laid. Then less than a minute behind that plane a huge white trail is laid right over top of the black trail. The latest he saw one was last week. (my contact is very credible.. not some kid.) there are also a few videos of black trails out there. (not saying that they are credible, but others are reporting the same thing.)

Here are photos I took this morning at 8:45 (click it to see the whole thing)
In this one you can see where the white trail merges with the black one beneath it. (its kinda blurry though so its hard to see, I could see it very well.)



This is a zoomed out view of the same one as above.. Here you can see the black trail peeking out from behind the white one all the way to the left of the photo and in the middle.
(Its kinda blurry though, sorry.. Im just a concerned citizen not a photographer)



Here are some other photos I took at about 9:15 (remember all the white in the sky is from the trails.. no real clouds.)


This next one is facing north.. all the other ones are facing south/southeast (10:45am)


This is facing south again. 10:45 You can see all older trails in the background but there is a plane laying a trail while I took it.. You can see in the middle of the trail it kinda doubles up.. (weird)(kinda blurry)


I have a bunch more from today and about once or twice a week for the last 3 months. Today's was the worst though.. and the first time I saw a black trail.


For all you guys out there who debunk chemtrails.. you do have a point. It would be noticed if such a large scale operation was going on. But they could just tell the planes to fly at certain altitudes to create as many persistent spreading contrails as possible. Then maybe lay a black "chem"trail into the mix to enhance the effects. (maybe) (There were at least 30 trails over my house and from what I could see.. 2 or just 1 really long black one that was laid at the very end of the the whole 3 hours of constant air traffic over my house.)
On a best case scenario they are just being negligent about the harmful persistent contrails.
Worst case they are spraying barium and aluminum into the sky and using haarp to magnify the effects.

Now, someone mentioned haarp earlier. I think there is a good possibility that they are using haarp (or similar facilities) the enhance the effects of these persistent contrails. A friend and I were discussing the possibility the other night. We concluded that they very well could be pulsing microwaves at the trails (heating them up then letting it cool down) to make the trails last even longer and spread out further than normal persistent contrails. Is this a possibility? (From what I understand, contrails are formed when the warm water vapor from the exhaust mixes with the cold humid air in the atmosphere.)

Sooo.. to the guys debunking this.. open your eyes a little, even if you are 100% right it still needs to be stopped ASAP.. and to the guys insisting that think they are spraying harmful chemicals on us accept the possibility that most of the trails out there are formed by water vapor. (The black ones are very interesting though.)

Either way you look at it the trails NEED to stop happening and WE need to open our mouths and get something done!!

Peace


[edit on 14-4-2008 by danman23]

[edit on 14-4-2008 by danman23]

Now you know why I'm opposed to our modern obsession with flying everywhere

Your holiday in the sun = me not seeing the sun

And commercial air traffic is expected to increase a lot more in the coming years - so it'll only get worse!

Originally posted by Gerizo

Originally posted by Zeus187

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by Gerizo

 

So rainbows are chemtrails to then?

dont be a flippin muppet dude, thats exactly the # we dont need in here, if these people want there intellegence insulted we will go watch sesame street or doctor phil.

if people here are insulting yours.... dont bother clicking in...

A flippin muppet? Wow! I don't think I insulted anyone's intelligence.(check your spelling)Ok,maybe now I did. Don't bother clicking in....ill comment if i chose too, if you don't like what i'm saying then simply click the ignore button.

Zeus my apologizes, I misread the quote, I was a little mad at a few other people's comments.

In response into what I meant to say about some of the chemtrails having a rainbow color look to them. The picture i just posted was in reference to what I was trying to describe. The other picture I took is one of the jets leaving the lines through out the blue sunny day. (Cell phone camera, sorry)Again not commercial traffic.

reply to post by danman23


danman....nice pics, again. Just cannot see the ones you claim to be 'black'.

Again, again and again....a teeny, narrow 'trail' is not going to have much effect, it has such a small 'footprint'. It is basic science. Sometimes a contrail will 'persist', but it gets thinner and thinner as it dissipates...plus, it STAYS UP THERE!! It does not, I repeat, dos not settle down on top of you!

Sorry, but when people confuse naturally occuring cirrus, or alto-cirrus clouds with something produced by the passage of an airplane, which is unnatural, of course, since heavier-than-air flight is obviously impossible

'black contrails'....that is certainly a new one. Again, I have flown for over 30 years and have yet to see a black contrail. (I can see their shadows, on the ground, or when another airplane flies under one)

Let's put our thinking hats on for a moment...take a look at photos of our planet, whether from satellites or the Shuttle...and notice just how much cloud cover actually exists. NOW, we can understand, that a lot of cloud cover will alter the albedo of the Earth's 'surface'...a higher albedo means more reflectivity, thus helping to 'cool' the planet. Our atmosphere is dynamic, always in motion, and while there is certainly more carbon being pumped into it as a result of the Industrial Revolution, I feel that has more of an effect, a long-term effect, rather than some imagined 'chemtrails'...but, you also brought HAARP into the discussion!

Really, this has gotten silly. HAARP somehow uses microwaves to affect the clouds, and the 'trails', but has no affect whatsoever on the airplanes and the passengers and crews?

Please explain this, we would like to understand this concept more clearly.

Thanks for your posts.

WW