Real Contrail Science, why they persist and why they spread out and why they are not chemtrails

Originally posted by Zepherian
reply to post by dave420

 

This is not about believing, this is about knowing. I know full well what I have, on several ocasions now, seen. The only thing I do not know, cannot really know, is the precise nature of what is being sprayed, beyond the fact that it seeds clouds over massive areas in a relatively short period of time and appears to have adverse effects on life on the ground.
And you're not being truthfull about his links, as many are relevant. Also, you have to understand that if this is indeed covert there will be no official links about this as it's being suppressed and lied about. Possibly by people like you.

The text I have underlined PMSL at that lets see the PROOF of that statement!!!

reply to post by thefreepatriot


I'm not being rude, but no-one has published any photos of "suspicious" formations that can not be readily explained by normal air traffic and atmospheric conditions.

Collecting a sample using an RC plane would be practically impossible, as I don't know of any RC planes that can fly at over 33,000ft.

And I still have to disagree - the only evidence that would show this is happening is a direct sample from an alleged chemtrail. No amount of anecdotal evidence is evidence this is happening, as it is not definitive evidence, just speculation (albeit most likely well-meaning, but not accurate enough to make anyone believe in this happening).

How many labs? As many as possible! Local universities (or even not-so-local) would most likely be more than happy to take a look for you. The more labs you send it to the more conclusive any positives would be, as that would effectively rule out any experimental factors arising from one particular lab's procedure.

reply to post by Bumr055


It's all of those. The sky is a fluid (as all gases and liquids are - they 'flow', hence 'fluid'), and it is not homogeneous - it is made up of pockets of vastly different temperatures, humidities, wind speeds, everything. And old jet engines and new jet engines run at different speeds, at different temperatures, and expel different amounts of exhaust, simply because technology has moved on a lot in 40 years.

And yes, of course there are more 'chemtrails' in the winter, as they are formed by hot exhaust condensing in the colder atmosphere. The colder the atmosphere, the more condensation. Just like you notice your breath when you breathe outside more in the winter - or is that 'chembreath', something else we should all be scared of?

It's not ridiculous - it's called "science".

[edit on 19/11/08 by dave420]

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
.. To all the skeptics here.. I would love it if you post what would be sufficient evidence to prove the phenomenon is happening.. then we will try to satisfy requirements..remember EVIDENCE.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by thefreepatriot]

Best evidence would be if you or others run under one and die
then you might be telling the truth! BUT YOU WONT because its not true.

Not one single bit of truth about chem trails its an URBAN MYTH gone out of control thats all!

I see “the guys” are at it again. Some of these guys group together and perform a sort of tag team blogging on this topic, thinking of themselves as contrail “experts”, making broad based claims about things that they haven’t seen and try to use disinformation and generalizations to explain away what you or any others may describe, attempting to call it logic or fact, when in reality it is neither.

One or two may have some reasonable knowledge of weather conditions with some merit in explaining a few atmospheric conditions that sometimes, let me repeat, sometimes answer specific questions on an odd looking contrail. But in no way are they able to legitimately explain away everything in the sky as simple contrails, unless of course they have all reached the level of all-knowing, all-seeing or omnipresent. In past posts, threads and blogs, they have gotten so wrapped up in debunking Chemtrails, they’ve failed to even realize ANY possible alternative answers to the issue. www.abovetopsecret.com...

The facts are that the United States Government has, on more than one occasion, admitted to testing on people without their knowledge or consent. Some of these tests have included “dusting” or spraying various chemicals on crops and the general landscape which in turn, is the general public. Some tests are still classified, ongoing and involve the use of planes and jets. Of those declassified, there were some planes and jets used. Also note the use of radio active ash in testing over various parts of the Tennessee Valley and the Ohio Valley, the prolonged exposure to various chemicals and so on.

There is also the question of various chemical additives in the very fuel used by the planes or jets which may have some negative or unforeseen health issues. Some additives could very well be part of a study or experiment. In a recent conversation with a retire military pilot, he told me that he was instructed to switch from one fuel tank to another on his jet at specific areas in his flight path. He could see a visible difference in his trail when switching tanks. So could his superiors as he was questioned for quickly switching back and forth between the tanks in an undesignated area of his choosing during a subsequent flight. He did this to confirm his earlier epiphany and better see the dot-dash-dot-dash trails, but explained it to his superior that he thought he could feel something odd in his jet and was concerned there was something wrong, perhaps a clog in the fuel line and was relieved that there wasn’t.

It should be completely understandable that many people become concerned about repeat or ongoing testing and examine the skies more closely than before, especially when they notice something, err, anything odd or out of place. Whether it is odd formations of Chemtrails in strange places, or a notable increase of poor health among people who have all but recently seemed healthy, it should be understood that these people have acquired the right to question and demand responsible answers instead of being subjected to sarcasm and ridicule by self proclaimed experts with no more accreditation than that they used to pump gas at an airport.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Lets have a look, sky is clearer in summer so you see more CON TRAILS
although it may be warm at ground level in the summer at 26-40,000 feet its
really cold!!!! or dont you know that

Are you people seriously saying that every passenger plane is pumping out chemicals

I wish I was a psychology student the net would keep me busy for life!!

Make up your minds.. should there be more visible contrails in winter or summer? I'm sure it's clouds blocking me form seeing the trails

Are you guys SERIOUSLY going to keep suggesting we think commercial aircraft are doing this?

reply to post by eaganthorn


No-one's saying the US hasn't tested on people without their consent before. We all know about the Tuskegee experiments. What I'm saying is that doesn't mean that they're doing it now, in the way alleged. There is no reasonable way to say the one implies the other.

My experiment would clear this up once and for all. Get a sample directly from an alleged chemtrail, and get it analysed by multiple labs. That's it. Simple. Until we find a chemtrail, we simply can not state they exist without lying to both ourselves and the person being told, as it can only be, by the very definition of what we know, a guess. If the sample comes back positive - take it to the media! They will be ALL over this. If, however, the result is just water and jet fuel exhaust, keep trying until you find one. If your conviction in this phenomenon is as great as it seems to be, that is a small price to pay to expose this heinous plot and protect everyone.

Don't take offense to the people in this thread - they are simply asking for evidence, not speculation. They want the smoking gun, not circumstantial evidence that doesn't concretely prove anything. If you want anyone who's in any position to change this to listen to the cause, they are going to need multiple samples from multiple planes that all contain a similar reading of out-of-the-ordinary chemicals. That's not too much to ask.

Just as smog inspections actually take a direct sample from your car's exhaust, and not a soil sample from your front garden and a sample of water from your guttering, chemtrail examination will need a sample taken directly from the aircraft in question. That is the only way to be sure.

reply to post by Bumr055


All the evidence suggests yes - it is just aircraft-induced condensation.

Did you read that PDFI posted? It explains most of the things you seem to not understand. It's no fault of your own - meteorology is not usually taught to most people. What is clear is that the colder the air around an aircraft (as one might expect in Winter) would lead to more contrails. Just as you can see your breath when outside in Winter, you can see contrails behind planes - they are made by the exact same phenomenon - condensation caused when hot humid air meets cold air. The water vapour in the hot air is instantly cooled by the cold air, and becomes visible.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by Bumr055

 

It's all of those. The sky is a fluid (as all gases and liquids are - they 'flow', hence 'fluid'), and it is not homogeneous - it is made up of pockets of vastly different temperatures, humidities, wind speeds, everything. And old jet engines and new jet engines run at different speeds, at different temperatures, and expel different amounts of exhaust, simply because technology has moved on a lot in 40 years.

And yes, of course there are more 'chemtrails' in the winter, as they are formed by hot exhaust condensing in the colder atmosphere. The colder the atmosphere, the more condensation. Just like you notice your breath when you breathe outside more in the winter - or is that 'chembreath', something else we should all be scared of?

It's not ridiculous - it's called "science".

[edit on 19/11/08 by dave420]

Wow.. thanks reading my post?? (sarcasm)

You just posted what I clearly said I ALREADY heard as an explanation.

Then say "of course theres more trails in the winter" When I said the complete opposite.

Yea, chembreath.. becasue I have ever seen persistent condensation coming from ME(sarcasm)... I would be scared if I did. One of you guys said it happens in Alaska "all the time" then disappeared in an older thread when I asked for a shred of proof.

EDIT:

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by Bumr055

 

All the evidence suggests yes - it is just aircraft-induced condensation.

Did you read that PDFI posted? It explains most of the things you seem to not understand. It's no fault of your own - meteorology is not usually taught to most people. What is clear is that the colder the air around an aircraft (as one might expect in Winter) would lead to more contrails. Just as you can see your breath when outside in Winter, you can see contrails behind planes - they are made by the exact same phenomenon - condensation caused when hot humid air meets cold air. The water vapour in the hot air is instantly cooled by the cold air, and becomes visible.

WOW.. you definitely didn't read my post... I'll say it again LESS PERSISTING CONTRAILS IN WINTER, MORE IN SUMMER.

Whats your PDF going to prove anyways? I could make up a PDF saying the opposite of whatever it sais.. judging by the amount you guys refer to it, I likely already have read it. I'll read it when I'm in linux and don't have to download unnecessarily bulky software to.

What source is the original PDF from and how was the information gathered to create it?

EDIT: I just tried going to www.bragwebdesign.com... (The PDF link without the PDF directory) and it's not even an English site.. plus it's uploaded to what appears to be a free web design site. Thats not a reliable source. Is the PDF even English?

[edit on 11/19/2008 by Bumr055]

[edit on 11/19/2008 by Bumr055]

reply to post by dave420


Your link isn't working.

The PDF.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by TruthTellist]

reply to post by Bumr055


The PDF cites its sources. It shows the maths that describes it. It's more solid evidence than anything the believers have put up so far.

Contrails require cold air to form. The temperature of the air at height is not necessarily the same on the ground. During Winter, or any cold snap, contrails will be able to form at lower altitudes, where the air is colder, and persist for longer. Can you cite your source for summer contrails persisting longer than winter ones?


reply to post by TruthTellist


It is working - just not for you. Maybe you should check your internet connection?

[edit on 19/11/08 by dave420]

Yet more claims that the spraying is so heavy, that it creates a haze in what was previously a clear sky. That's HEAVY spraying folks.

When pesticides are sprayed even miles (or even dozens of miles), it can be found in soil, in insects (and thus birds, fish, etc), streams, and so on.

Yet this stuff is sprayed even heavier, over massive amounts of land, and nothing is found in groundwater samples or soil samples? Please explain this anomoly. It makes no sense.

Finding known land-based chemicals in SOME samples means nothing. Yes, there are indeed known hazerdous chemicals in some water and soil samples. Yet this spraying would show up in ALL sampling across an area. It does not.

If you are going to rabidly support the idea that massive spraying takes place over populated areas, you need to have some explanation about the lack of evidence on the ground, where this stuff eventually ends up. You can't just conveniently ignore it because it doesn't fit neatly into your preconceived ideas of planes poisoning the populace.

reply to post by dave420


Well, I don’t take offense to people who are respectful and wish to debate the issue. I do get offended by those who arbitrarily attach the person, subject them to ridicule, yada, yada, yada, while deflecting the issue.

While I support the idea of testing the Chemtrails, I understand the logistics of the attempt to do so. It would require a fueled and ready jet at every airport in the nation, set up in advance with the necessary equipment and a pilot on hand to fly it into a suspected Chemtrail to do the testing. The cost would be outrageous.

A practical alternative would be to commission multiple, independent designs of a fuel emissions recorder/capture devices and mandate installation on every aircraft, military and civilian. Coupled with a sample testing of all aircraft emissions would be a tremendous benefit for everyone as far as environment control and protection and is long overdue. I am aware of groups that have fought for this since the late seventies. The knowledge that an emissions test would and could be conducted on any aircraft, military or civilian, at anytime would certainly curb the idea of Chemtrail experiments, as long as those conducting the emissions testing were above reproach.

Next up would be the chemical compositions of each of the additives in the fuels. They’re MSDS data page should be supplied in FULL formulation and posted with each depot and subjective to on the fly field testing by independent groups. And to be compared against the emissions data from ground and capture testing in flight for any differential emission. This would go a very long way in eliminating the Chemtrail issue if not altogether and would not be cost preventative and therefore, feasible.

reply to post by eaganthorn


No, it just takes one jet, as apparently (according to believers) these chemtrails are all over the place (or, at least, they would have to be to achieve what the advocates are claiming). A few samples from a few alleged-chemtrails would be sufficient. Once a few actual chemtrails are located, the whole can of worms would be opened.

Fitting things to aircraft won't work, as the believers think they're in on it, so if the recorders return "no chemicals released", they'd be able to chime in with "but they're in on it! that means nothing!"

The only way to demonstrate chemtrails as happening is to take samples directly from an alleged chemtrail. That is it. That is the only way to show this is happening. Until that happens, all rational folks can do is accept that it might be happening, but that there is no evidence of it actually happening.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
reply to post by dave420

 

It would require a fueled and ready jet at every airport in the nation, set up in advance with the necessary equipment and a pilot on hand to fly it into a suspected Chemtrail to do the testing.

Shouldn't be that difficult really. Doesn't really seem as though you should need a "standby" pilot. According to the "enthusiasts" these things hang around for amazing lengths of time.....in very large numbers. It's not like one would need an interceptor type craft to go get a simple air sample. Other than figuring out what kind of collection device would be needed. Heck, I'll bet nearly any competent engineer could devise something that would capture an atmospheric sample.

Why would you need to involve every airport in the nation? Just get the rough location of one of the "enthusiasts" right here at ATS.....heck, they see it all the time.

Edit: I don't know if it's a good thing, or a bad thing, that dave420 is thinking like me......



[edit on 19-11-2008 by MrPenny]

reply to post by MrPenny


Have we violently disagreed in the past? Please forgive me if I can't remember

Actually, I think a weather balloon would work to take a sample, provided it can be steered through the desired sample area. It should be able to detect when it passes through the alleged-chemtrail, what with all the chemicals (just saying, not mocking - that's what the theory says).

Although ideally, yeah - a jet flying through the contrail/chemtrail, with a device similar to this one, though not mounted on a rocket, would be fine for taking samples.

Until that happens, believers can not utter a word about people not believing, as there simply is no smoking gun linking the theory to the practice. It's fine people think this stuff is real, but they have to understand they are not doing it through concrete evidence, but because of something else. Whatever else it is, I'll leave up to the individual believer to figure out.

Originally posted by MrPenny
Edit: I don't know if it's a good thing, or a bad thing, that dave420 is thinking like me......

Bad thing... VERY bad

Now if someone were to take samples, like as you suggest one of the " 'believers' who sees them all the time"

Would you then accept the fact?

Chemtrail Samples Texas & Moregllon's Samples Collected by
Dr. Hildegarde Staninger RIET-1
Industrial Toxicologist/IH & Doctor of Integrative Medicine
Originally Reported in Phase II Samples from January 8, 2007 results
Received March 20, 2007 PROJECT FMM- Dr. Hildegarde Staninger,
RIET-1


Filament Deposition Near Venice, Italy
Samples Collected by Dr. Luca Zamengo, November 10, 2007
( Dr. Luca Zamengo utilized the laboratory facilities of the University
of Venice Italy )

www.nogw.com...

Of course the Air Force has a slightly different view on 'contrails'

Aircraft, engines, chaff, and flares can produce a variety of condensation patterns (or contrails), exhaust plumes, vapor trails, or smoke patterns. The exhaust emissions produced by aircraft and space launch vehicles can produce contrails that look very similar to clouds which can last for only a few seconds or as long as several hours. Vapor trails are formed only under certain atmospheric conditions and create a visible atmospheric wake similar to a boat propeller in water and usually dissipate very rapidly. Chaff and flares produce unique smoke patterns that are visibly different than a contrail but have the same color and appearance as a cloud but which also typically dissipates very quickly. Aerial spraying for pest or weed control and fire
suppression are the only Air Force activities which involve aircraft intentionally spraying chemical compounds (insecticides, herbicides, fire retardants, oil dispersants). In the case of an in-flight emergency, jet fuel may be released to lighten the landing weight and minimize the risk of fire if the aircraft should crash.

So at the very least the Air Force is saying that there are persisting smoke and exhaust fume trail from both airplanes AND space craft but they are only chaff and flares (though I never recall a spacecraft deploying chaff or flares, though I could be wrong on that )

So I have just established that not ALL trails in the sky are simple vapor trails . So I wonder what they are 'UNintentionally' spraying

I guess they were getting enough flak over this that they needed to publish a paper

They further state...

Aircraft engines emit water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), small amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur gases, and soot and metal particles formed by the high-temperature combustion of jet fuel during flight. Of these emittants, only water vapor is necessary for contrail formation. Sulfur gases are also of potential interest because they lead to the formation of small particles. Particles suitable for water droplet formation are necessary for contrail formation. Initial contrail particles, however, can either be already present in the atmosphere or formed in the exhaust gas. All other engine emissions are considered nonessential to contrail formation.

...carbon dioxide (CO2), small amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur gases, and soot and metal particles...

sounds like more than water vapor to me... what kind of 'metal particles' are formed in military jet exhaust

So they are not Chemtrails, but Chemically Laden Contrails

reply to post by dave420


Ok, let’s back up here Dave, and lets not start assuming who is who and what they believe or else you’ll find yourself flat out and wondering what happened. If you want to find out where I stand on the issue, you need only read what I have written thus far in this thread and threads in the link I posted earlier.

The wild blue yonder is a big open space, so you’ll need to focus if you really want an answer, a solution, and respect.
If you are going to take a sample of a chemtrail from the air, you will need to come to some sort of definitive understanding of what one is, where it can be found, the time of day it is to be there, all in advance, all which goes against the very nature of a conspiracy.

Once you figure out what it is to test, come talk to me and I’ll give you a cost effective means for a suitable test and method to capture it, otherwise this is nothing more than another smoke and mirrors deflection.

As far as the emission testing go, that is still needed anyway, so unless I have misread you, I see where you really are in regards to this issue.


[edit on 11/19/2008 by eaganthorn]

reply to post by eaganthorn


That's my point - we need the believers to actually quantify what a chemtrail is, where they are found, and when to find them. Once that is done, getting a sample would be a lot easier.

That's the only way to get to the bottom of this - first, find out what a chemtrail is supposed to be, then find one, then take samples. Rinse. Repeat. Until we get a positive sample, we can only say chemtrails are a possibility, not an actually-occurring phenomenon.

reply to post by zorgon


Those are not direct samples. They are of fibres people suspect, but can't demonstrate, came from alleged chemtrails. They can't prove anything, as even if the fibres are found to be exotic in nature, they might be from anywhere.

And yes, just like the exhaust from your car is not just water, the same applies to jet engines. What they don't emit, however, is the barium and aluminium people claim they do, in such great quantities.

If someone could sample a contrail directly, and send it to be analysed, and suspect chemicals in sufficient quantity to affect people on the ground were found, I'd be the biggest chemtrail believer.

My mind is open, but open to evidence, not conjecture.

So I suppose THESE are just normal 'contrails' as well?