It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Chemtrails : I don't think you understand.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 03:27 AM
There is one thing ive always wondered about.

Assuming the conspiracy is real, and 'they' want to infect/disease/alter/whatever us with chemicals, isnt spraying them from a jet a pretty lame delivery method?

Itd make it very hard to target any particular area, and leave your chemicals at the mercy of random wind shifts etc. It wouldnt take much of a change in conditions for the majority of anything sprayed to end up miles away from where intended. This stuff is obviously light, because it persists for hours. Something thats going to take hours to drift down could be well off target.

There would have to be better ways.

Surely if you wanted to do whatever to major parts of the population youd go for options like using the water supply, pumping it through the aircon at major malls, etc where something like a puff of wind wouldnt throw your plans out of whack.

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 03:33 AM
reply to post by HeHasNoName

One theory is that HAARP is one of the main reasons for doing these "sprays" , apparently the metal they put in the atmosphere can help HAARP transmit to/through the designated area with greater efficiency.

Something we can all do I believe is to simply observe everything in those days of spraying and the next day or two after. Just observe people, nature and yourself, see if illness rises on those days, heyfever is worse, asthma ect. Also observe peoples moods and actions especially on these days. Personally I have not yet really seen anything out of the norm.


posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 03:41 AM
reply to post by dAlen

Good post
. Not that i agree with most of it, but it could be simply because i am wrong.

For me the most absurd idea is that a plane cant or doesn't spray.

But nobody really will argue with that. What i find weird is that with claims of governments spraying active chemicals - no chemical that should not be in the jet fuel burning was found. If it is sprayed in the air - it can be found by a descent lab as long as concentrations are not homeopathic.

So far - nothing. Now if it is real and something that influences our body is being sprayed - why such a amateur approach? This method of "delivering" of drug is very unreliable and not easy to design. Winds, air routes and atmospheric conditions can totally change concentrations in different places on ground - and then people should be influenced differently. Molecule/s have to be stable under different conditions. Now there are much easier, cheaper and more precise ways to effect general population. Water - for example. I simply do not understand why bother with chemtrail method if there are other easier ones?
Not to mention that if the stuff they spray (big if) is working on the body it must have undesirable (question is what are desirable effects, of course) side effects and in the general population genetic/other diversity can cause groups of people being more or less affected. From pharmaceutical point of view it seems a very lame approach if considering all this.
Of course, without knowing the purpose (not to mention - existence) of this world-wide issue - all my points can be totally irrelevant.
Edit - oops. Missed the post be HeHasNoName.

[edit on 22-8-2008 by ZeroKnowledge]

[edit on 22-8-2008 by ZeroKnowledge]

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 03:52 AM
First off - I want to admit that several things have been brought to my attention that I was not aware of. Thank you very much for this. I am fully prepared to accept any facts which are presented to me, I only ask that everyone else do the same.

Moving on.. several good links have been posted here and each contains good bits of info. Here is a bit of cherry picking on my part :


Persistent contrails pose no direct threat to public health. All contrails are line-shaped clouds composed of ice particles. These ice particles evaporate when local atmospheric conditions become dry enough (low enough relative humidity). The ice particles in contrails do not reach the Earth’s surface because they fall slowly and conditions in the lower atmosphere cause ice particles to evaporate.

Now please note - I live in Houston Texas and have for my entire life. I keep pointing this out because it is of special importance as Houston is known for being extremely humid during the summer months. The humidity is absolutely epic. Texas is so humid it's mentioned in the Wikipedia article on humidity. It's so blazing hot and humid here air conditioning an nearly an essential for survival.

Remember, very humid. Close to the Gulf of Mexico. Very humid.

It is repeatedly said that persistent contrails form in humid environments. Now please stop and think. Why would I bother to take photos and make post about contrails which I've supposedly seen my entire life? Why would I not see these types of trails almost all of the time? The answer is simple; the trails I'm seeing are not caused by humidity.

I watch for these trails on a constant basis. I see these trails so inconsistently I couldn't even put a number to it. I noted a few within the past week but before that batch I hadn't spotted any for a while. How is this possible when I live in one of the most humid places in America which has two major airports? How is this possible?

From now on I will make note of the date and time of when I see these. Do note that I already have several dozen digital photos with accurate time stamps and I will review these and post the associated dates and times for your own review. Thus far I've noted sets of photos from Aug 07, Nov 07 and Jan 08.

[edit on 22-8-2008 by LoveKnowledge]

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 04:26 AM

Originally posted by LoveKnowledge

Will you accept this ?

Once a contrail is produced it typically will last only a short time if the ambient humidity is low, and may never be evident from ground level. Only during a unique range of favorable conditions will contrails persist and spread, both horizontally and vertically, producing a cloudlike sky.


Those unique conditions are temperatures below -35c and relative humidity of 60% or above.

I have personally observed aircraft forming trails at less than 23,000 ft. I have personally observed the trail of this craft 'flick off' for a second then come right back on full tilt. None of this should be possible. I know it was less than 23k feet because there are several big buildings nearby to gauge by AND the size of the aircraft was very large, it was obvious the jet was close.

How can you gauge the altitude of an aircraft at 23,000ft by comparing with a building a few hundred feet high?

Also, the size of the aircraft is dependent on both vertical and horizontal distance from you.

However, we can argue all day and all night over this. There is no way of proving one way or the other what height these particular aircraft were unless we can determine exact flight details for them.

Contrails can, of course, form at 23,000ft anyway.

Originally posted by LoveKnowledge
NASA's Persistent Contrail Formation Forecast data for THE DAY and THE TIME which I personally photographed these 'trails'

Do note there is nothing forecast within 300miles of the Houston area.

Well there's nothing in the picture to say it persisted more than a few minutes. But I'll take your word for it.

However, the contrail formation forecast is for between 01.00 and 02.00 UTC on 30th Nov 2007 - which by my calculation would be between 19.00 and 20.00 on 29th Nov 2007 in Houston (Houston is 6 hours behind UTC). Which is about an hour and a half after sunset.

Have you confused the times?

If you meant 1pm on the 30th Nov, for example, then looking at the predictor for 19.00UTC we get a different picture

(of course the predictor is just a computer model and as such is not always correct)

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 04:38 AM
Thank you very much for pointing out my error with the forecast tool. I did enter the time incorrectly which led to a completely inaccurate picture where as your settings show that my area was forecast for heavy trails that day.

edit : I've already stated how I'm able to approximate distance.

[edit on 22-8-2008 by LoveKnowledge]

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 05:12 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by LoveKnowledge

I'm becoming quiet curious as to what YOUR experience is. So please do share with all of us what your qualifications are.

Well since you asked....

I used to live under the main North South Airlane in the UK, near to Manchester Airport (the fourth busiest airport in the UK) and Liverpool John Lennon and on the flight paths to the private airfields of BAE systems at Wharton in Lancashire and Broughton in North Wales.

I currently live near to Leeds/Bradford Airport, in Yorkshire. I have, with the exception of this year, been to 2-3 major UK airshows a year for the past 15 years.

I've been looking at things in the sky for over 30 years. Flight fascinates me.

And I can tell you now that I would not, ever, be so bold as to be able to tell someone I could gauge the height of a plane at distance because of the height of a building, unless I knew the height of that building and the plane skimmed the roof of it.

Thats because I am a Civil Engineer by profession, and I understand trigonometry, and that height percieved over distance depends on viewing angles, and that the slightest change or misperception of an angle over distance can result in huge discrepancies - especially when you are looking at something that is literally miles away.

You'd need to know the wingspan (or length) of the plane - and ID'ing a plane from distance is not easy (specifically if viewed side on, or from an angle) You'd need to know the exact distance of seperation horizontally between you and the plane, and then you'd need to be able to calculate the viewing angle. You would also need to know the exact distance to the building, and its exact height, and then do some pythagoran equations in order to get the right answer.

Get any of those factors wrong, and you could be out by literally thousands of feet.

You can look up, and you can guess, but you don't know. Plain and simple.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:40 AM

Originally posted by LoveKnowledge

The main products of hydrocarbon fuel combustion are carbon dioxide and water vapor. At high altitudes this water vapor emerges into a cold environment, and the local increase in water vapor can push the water content of the air past saturation point. The vapor then condenses into tiny water droplets and/or deposits into ice. - Wikipedia

Exactly right, gold star

Chemtrails persist for hours and turn into large clouds. This is not the activity of bits of ice. Ice melts.

Hmmm, atmospheric ice does not melt. its far to cold up there. And contrails do persist. Contrails are able to persist if the atmosphere is cold enough, and moist enough. Like you said above, the introduction of more water vapour into the environment from jet exhaust supersaturates the air, what happens when air is supersaturated? The droplets grow in size, as they do so the collect other water droplets (or ice) further increasing the size of the water particles which can lead to growth of contrails into a layer of cloud known as cirrostratus. Wind dispersion can also help spread contrails into a layer, especially if the plane leaving the contrails, is flying through a jetstream (which is common, just ask a pilot). Providing that atmosphere is moist, dispersion will increase the chance of supersaturation, resulting in the formation of cirrostratus

Contrails dissipate. This is the nature of science - it can not be any other way. Ice forms, then melts. Please read this repeatedly until it completely sinks in. Ice forms, hangs out, then melts. This is completely normal as this is what ice is suppose to do.

Contrails dissipate if the atmosphere is too dry for supersaturation to occur. As I said before, atmospheric ice does not melt. If you dont believ me, remove and iceblock from the freezer, then put the ice block back into the freezer.....i bet it doesnt melt. The atmosphere is much colder than a freezer, so obviously the ice does melt

It is NOT POSSIBLE for contrails - which are made of ICE to spread into large clouds which blanket massive areas. NOT POSSIBLE.

If this is not true, then please debunk the 150 years of meteorology describing cirrostratus

Nothing anyone can say makes this possible. N O T H I N G. Science absolutely prohibits this. Please understand that.

On the contrary, if one does understand the physics and meteorology of the atmosphere, then one will find that the science absolutely permits this. However to "spray" chemicals or whatever on the population at such a height to land on someone is unplausible, comsidering the large differences in wind speed and direction among the thousands of feet of where airplanes spray and where the ground is. If I really wanted to poison someone, a few litres of something nasty in a town water supply would be much more effective

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:05 AM
reply to post by dAlen

Well put!

These experts will tell us to ignore these sinister chemtrails
until we all have respiratory problems and enlarged hearts.

Like I've said before, it's silver iodide for weather manipulation.

The reason they use silver, is because it doesn't corrode like barium or aluminum. Has been in use for decades.

Check out the price of silver lately. It has skyrocketed.

These "experts" simply are paid by the government to make us look the other way. Shame on them.

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 04:52 PM
I live in Las Vegas Nevada where the sun shines 300 days a year. Sometimes we get clouds, but usually not. It is usually pretty hot and dry since we live in a DESERT so any type of moisture or condensation is sucked up pretty dang fast.
There are lots of planes arround ferrying visitors, but planes fly in "patterns" to keep the the air traffic consistent and avoid accidents.
I tell you this before I invite you to view the pictures I took with my cell phone in a shopping center parking lot of the lattice-weave streaks across the sky. Make your own conclusions.

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:49 PM
reply to post by schrodingers dog
The Chemtrails over Washington, DC was in full bloom early this morning. It seems as though the Sky Spiders spray us during the night. So first thing in the morning look up in the sky people. Congress has ok'ed the spraying of the public. Do your RESEARCH PEOPLE

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:25 PM
reply to post by LoveKnowledge

Damn Skippy Love Knowledge

I've tried spreading that word too, but some people ( and i think they are paid propagandist or just idiots who like saying no in the face of facts) just hate on the idea that it could be true

Kudos on this thread, some people just need to get the facts straight

but even then they just refuse to get it

they refuse with extreme prejudice

keep up the good work

and don't get discouraged by the crazies ( I.E. Rush Limbaugh cultist)

they shouldn't even be at this site as far as I'm concerned

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 07:48 PM
reply to post by OzWeatherman

Ah OZ Weatherman [SNIP]?

telling everyone how contrails don't exist because of your astute examinations on the other side of the friggin planet?


and you have yet to answer how a "contrail" can haze out over a whole skyline in a few hours

the smell, the taste

I understand you don't have theses problems in Austrailia ( which is one of the many reasons i wanna move to Austrailia ) but you can't tell me that this is just Ice crystals, i mean c'mon that's the same4 lame excuses NASA gives when they lie about something

so come up with an original line, or just say your clueless to the arial activities of planes in this hemisphere!!

( yes my spelling sucks, just pay attention to the statement not the grammer, please)

Mod Edit: Civility and decorum are required - Please read.

[edit on 23-8-2008 by Gemwolf]

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 01:53 AM

Originally posted by goukilock

telling everyone how contrails don't exist because of your astute examinations on the other side of the friggin planet?

No, he's telling you that contrails do exist - you;re the ones denying their existence, despite all the evidence to the contrary

and you have yet to answer how a "contrail" can haze out over a whole skyline in a few hours

It's been explained umpteen times - if you can't be bothered to read basic meteorological explanations, and instead have to resort to insults, that's your problem.

Just because you refuse to accept simple atmospheric physics doesn't mean it isn't real!

No one has yet explained why what you see in the sky cannot be normal contrails. I wonder why?

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 03:03 AM
I get a bit agitated by the con/chem debate all the time on pics.

I think the best angle to approach this is, for example last year it was public knowledge admitted by authorities that there was spraying over california, of chemicals that some people weren't happy about (others said they are harmless, like mercury

I think it's better to concentrate on those examples of forced medication and spraying that we can actually prove with government documents. Once people are shown those, then the debate about what a cloud should look like doesn't even matter anymore. And if some are secret, then once people understand that some actual spraying does go on, and that it is admitted (although they claim for good reasons, and safely), then people will take the whole chemtrail, and secret spraying way more seriously.

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 04:47 AM
I have on occasion witnessed con/chemtrail and watching the planes over great swaths of the sky suddenly puff out, then resume the trail in a few miles or so. Barring a double engine jet flare out and resumption of engine power I would be more inclined to believe a switch tanks scenario.

The very fact that this is cannon fodder for such heated debate 'every' time is also interesting to me.

[edit on 8/23/2008 by jpm1602]

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 06:31 AM
reply to post by jpm1602

What's wrong with the decades old meteorological explanation - that the aircraft flew through a pocket of warmer or drier air?

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 06:34 AM
Ya. I expected that Essan. Why are you Oz's hand puppet? I could see that coming a mile away.

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 05:00 PM
reply to post by Essan

Ok, my point was that he's told me that "CHEMTRAILS" don't exist, and that it's all contrail

everyday i wake up on the WestBank of New Orleans and see planes making a checker board of the sky, then i watch as those lines fatten and haze, as the day goes by until finally all the fat lines have intersected and taken up the whole sky, then you taste metal, but you smell somthing chemeically before that, if not at the same time

so thats just contrails hu?

He has explained NOTHING

sorry if i was unclear in my first statement but i'm typing inbetween doing crap at work

so if anyone wants to come down here and see for themselves,
I work at the Travel lodge in Harvey, on the West Bank of new orleans

come on down

(maybe i should get a time laps camera .....Hmmmmm)

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 05:44 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I It is usually pretty hot and dry since we live in a DESERT so any type of moisture or condensation is sucked up pretty dang fast.

Just because it is hot and dry at the surface, does not mean it cant be moist higher up in the atmopshere.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in