Why don't contrails show up on water vapor satellite? Because they are chemtrails., page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 36 times

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 11:23 AM by Essan

There is indeed still a lot of research going into the effects of persistent contrails on climate.

During the day they do seem to lead to cooling ( reflecting solar radiation back out to space). But at night and in winter they lead to warming (reflecting outgoing radiation back down to earth). Current thinking is that the overall net effect is of warming.

Pat Minnis (NASA) believes that all recent warming in N American could be due to contrails (though this conclusion has been disputed)

One thing is for sure: they turn our skies hazy and I don't like them!

There are certainly no benefits. And the only way to stop them (at present) is to stop flying

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 11:56 AM by Manasseh

reply to post by Essan

There are certainly no benefits. And the only way to stop them (at present) is to stop flying

Why not change the cruising altitude?

20000 ft would change atmospheric conditions, and leave 6000 ft above mt tops.

I'm glad we agree that contrails (I call em chemtrails) are affecting our atmosphere to a great degree.

I'm disappointed that you feel we must just live (or die) with them.

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 01:17 PM by Essan

Originally posted by Manasseh
reply to post by Essan

There are certainly no benefits. And the only way to stop them (at present) is to stop flying

Why not change the cruising altitude?

20000 ft would change atmospheric conditions, and leave 6000 ft above mt tops.

I'm glad we agree that contrails (I call em chemtrails) are affecting our atmosphere to a great degree.

I'm disappointed that you feel we must just live (or die) with them.

Well, I I'm a pessimist - don't hold much hope of convincing others (I've not been in a plane since 1984 btw - though largely for other reasons). But the issue (including flying at lower altitudes) is being discussed

Source

Dr Noland also believes that the work has direct relevance to aircraft manufacturers. He says, There is little more that aircraft designers can do to increase engine fuel efficiency at high altitude, but designing new aircraft that can be as fuel efficient flying at 20,000 feet, as todays aircraft are at 35,000 feet, would help eliminate contrails.

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 02:29 PM by Manasseh

I found this interesting song written by CW McCall

(C.W. McCall, Bill Fries, Chip Davis)

Well, now, pay attention people
Just in case you hadn't heard
There's some folks messin' 'round
With Mother Nature's little world, baby
And what they do is really freaky
They gets themselves a plane
And they fly it around with chemicals, baby
Tryin' ta make it rain
So when you're out there in that blizzard,
Shiverin' in the cold
Just look up to the sky
And thank the Government for the snow
And sing the low-down, experimental, cloud-seedin',
Who-needs-'em-baby? silver i-i-o-dide blues

www.lyricsondemand.com...

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 02:45 PM by alphabetaone

Like surface clutter with NEXRAD, Water Vapor GOES Satellites are filtered because they are primarily for meterology. Contrails serve no purpose to the meteorological professional from a weather perspective.

Why would GOES images reflect an anomoly that is useless for weather prediction?

Quantifying water vapor ion the atmosphere is measure by PWV (precipitable water vapor), typically measured in mm, or the amount of precipitable liquid within a given column.

The area between the Lower boundary of the troposphere and the upper boundary, consists of a great deal of water vapor (in fact, mostly water vapor). Were there no passband filters you would never get a clear image of where PWV was or not.

AB1

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 03:07 PM by Manasseh

Here's an interesting video concerning weather modification

YouTube Link

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 03:18 PM by Deaf Alien

reply to post by firepilot

I am quite sure you cause more harm to the world when you go out and drive a vehicle and pollute, than anything caused by silver iodide seeding.

I gave you a star for that. That is very true.

We, especially people who believe that the government is spraying chemtrails on us, need to focus on the damages we are doing to the environment and ourselves. In fact, the government doesn't need to do anything because we are doing this to ourselves!

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 03:52 PM by avingard

reply to post by Manasseh

The images you provide that are standard water vapor images are of a much larger area than the one that shows the contrails. If you provided a water vapor image that covered only one or two states, then I'm sure you'd see contrails.

If I take a picture of my hand, I can't see the single skin cells. That doesn't mean they aren't there, just that the image doesn't have sufficient zoom.

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 04:34 PM by logician magician

Originally posted by Manasseh
reply to post by semperfortis

Umm, those are INFRARED imaged, not standard water vapor images.

Here is the most current WATER VAPOR satellite image. Not a contrail in sight.

weather.unisys.com...

Why do they have to show enhanced infrared satellite images to get contrails to show up if they are water vapor. They SHOULD be showing up in the water vapor images, but they don't.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by Manasseh]

Are you serious? You expect to see something that is at most a few meters wide on an image that shows the entire United States?

Something isn't right here. You must read this before you do anything else, lest you hurt yourself: en.wikipedia.org...(ratio)

edit: Holy crap, it shows half the world! That makes it worse!

[edit on 7-9-2008 by logician magician]

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 04:48 PM by Manasseh

reply to post by logician magician

So the contrails got bigger when they show up in the enhanced infrared?

How's about some logic, logician.

[edit on 7-9-2008 by Manasseh]

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 05:07 PM by star in a jar

'Typically, silver iodide is released into the air from strategically placed ground generators to produce artificial ice nuclei. Aircraft seeding is also used, but is much more expensive'

Yes great detective work! I would think that they are indeed silver based elements (fragments) reflecting heat off the sun? You can see 'shooting off' patterns in the second image, I wonder how they're doing it from the ground? High pressurized air? Balloons? Balloons would be the most ideal way to distribute this awful thing into our atmosphere if there were no mountains around. They could be doing it from the mountains, or at a huge cost, from aircraft. I always wondered if chemtrails were bad science but now I realize that they are indeed cloud seeding.

Are they seeding Hurricanes? On purpose? Was there not an increase in the number and severity of hurricanes over the last 10 years?

Because of continued damages, America is becoming financially poorer, Americans owe Billions, maybe Trillions. But no matter, FEMA is there, and they are stronger than ever because of Hurricane Katrina

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 06:10 PM by logician magician

Originally posted by Manasseh
reply to post by logician magician

So the contrails got bigger when they show up in the enhanced infrared?
[edit on 7-9-2008 by Manasseh]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, based on your initial post.

Do you think objects get bigger when you look at them through a microscope, or do you think that the instrument of detection is allowing for a higher resolution picture?

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 06:18 PM by Skelkie3

Thanks, OP-as with any investigation- every bit of evidence helps.

Of course there are contrails and chemtrails and other airborne human-caused agents ( experiments with WMD dispersal, etc. ) floating around out there.

Too bad we often look silly, haggling over the details...

My point is- look at the pictures submitted by the OP ( and contributed by other posters ). I don't care if these are rose petals in the sky... there's just too many of them to be healthy.

Take every jet engine in use and set them up somewhere like a bunsen burner, and- how many mile across would this thing be ? How much heat would it be emmitting ? How much pollution ?

Some facts to consider- there are tens of thousands of piston engines being used every day. They are usually too low to cause visible trails.
Did you know that most of them are exempt from restrictions on using lead ? Military aircraft almost never emit contrails because they are designed not to. It was learned in the 1940's that the best way to target an aircraft is to sight in on the vapor trail, wether visually, or using radar...

The photos posted so far have no visual whatever on hundreds of pollution-spewing aircraft that should otherwise be included !

This whole issue makes us look like a bunch of dumb animals who will trample their own pasture.

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 06:32 PM by Skelkie3

reply to post by Essan

" the only way to stop them ( at present ) is to stop flying. "

You make a good point Essan.

I had a conversation with my neighbor along these lines years ago.
He said, ' I have to fly out to Atlanta and it sucks because I hate flying '.
I said, ' why don't you not go ?'.
He said, ' my mother lives in Atlanta, I love her, so I go out once a month to visit '.
I said, ' oh ' .

I wanted to say that if you really loved your mother that much- you'd still be in Atlanta yourself... but I didn't.

Point is- just how well do our excuses for flying really hold up ?

Chemtrails or contrails be damned- flying and the industries that support it are deadly to many and destructive to all.

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 06:51 PM by alphabetaone

reply to post by Skelkie3

Ok, and that's fine for you to have that opinion.

That being said, I will be the first one on board AND to support you, when; the economy in your general locale breaks down, the only job you can find is 1000 miles away, then the mother that YOU love and want to visit, that you start your 1000 mile trek on foot...I'll cheer you every step of the way from way up high.

I mean seriously, you denigrate your neighbor for living so far from his mother THEN for wanting the most expedient way of getting to visit her? I think that show's a serious lack of compassion on your part, especially when you may not have a full understanding of the circumstances that lead up to that neighbor being there in the first place.

Yes, I absolutely advocate a complete replacement of airliners with the horse and buggy again. I always knew the amish had something on us.

Meanwhile you probably are a proponent of what, a GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY that is *gasp* seeding our clouds via *gasp again* American Airlines? Good gosh! I certainly wish this WERE true, perhaps THEN they would be able to receive Government subsidy and not have to charge us so damn much claiming fuel prices!

AB1

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 07:38 PM by Skelkie3

reply to post by alphabetaone

Yes, alphabetaone- the things that I wanted to say but didn't were very insensative at best. I would have been extremely ashamed had I actually said them. But I didn't.

How well do our excuses for flying really hold up- when there is evidence that people may be dying because of it ?

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 08:00 PM by weedwhacker

reply to post by Manasseh

Manasseh...oh, come on!!!

That "Smiley Face" is such an obvious photoshop job....Come on!!!!

There are truly intelligent people, here at ATS.

To think that you'd resort to such an obvious baloney piece of junk post, is beyond distain.

This, to follow-up on the well debunked photo of the inside of a Boeing 777-300 in flight testing, purported to be a 'chemtrail spraying' airplane....

Twice busted!!

THIS is why I fear for the integrity of ATS.....nonsense being posted, and as ATS grows, the ability of Staff to cope tends to diminish...what a shame!

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 09:25 PM by ravenflt

Meaning those contrails are not pure water, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, or chlorofluorocarbons. Since those contrails aren't showing up in the regular water IR heat absorption region we know that it is not pure water, it must be something else as they had to use 2 different IR bands to detect them. I would guess some kind of metal.

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 09:34 PM by TheAgentNineteen

I can tell you that MOST of what you see in the sky is nothing more than Water Vapor. There are of course experiments with Weather Manipulation and "Cloud Seeding" if you will, but these are by-and-far select experiments, not some massive front being perpetrated through commercial airlines. It is basic common sense that with heat and exhaust emanating from engines at higher altitudes, you will be faced with crystallized condensation. You can witness a minor mirror of this very phenomenon with your own passenger vehicle on any cold day. Even with a team of Huskies pulling a Sled, in -40 Degrees F. Weather, you will have a cloud trail that spreads out behind you, and hugs the ground for a long period of time. This is nothing short of a natural occurrence.

As for why you cannot pick these up on the Water Vapor Imagery, it is due to the fact that the resolution is extremely low. Do you really think cloud cover is as smooth as portrayed in the first GOES image you have provided? The sharpness is heavily reduced, and the image is displayed "as is" for a basic overview of current condensed-cloud cover. The second image is obviously enhanced to a much higher degree of detail.

If you wish to compare images, then why not do so with equally enhanced ones?

Here is a GOES IR equivalent to the GOES WV which you have provided. Do you see any Contrails on it?

reply posted on 7-9-2008 @ 11:01 PM by pteridine

reply to post by Manasseh

I have read these posts about "chem trails" and find them puzzling. Cloud seeding is just that -- adding things to clouds to make rain. Adding things to clear air doesn't do much. Adding water to clear air that is saturated in water vapor makes condensation trails. If it is cold, the trails are small ice crystals.
Who would want to add silver iodide to clear air? It would not accomplish anything other than have silver iodide rain down out of the sky; a very expensive rain. Certainly, if you are proposing chemical attack from commercial airliners, there are much better chemicals to attack with but it is unlikely that they would be doing anything at 35,000 feet. Think about crop-dusters altitudes for chemical attack.