It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausible, and Meteorologically Innacurate

page: 12
43
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ::.mika.::
 



Sure why not.

Chemtrails over Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Turkey and Cyprus

Chemtrails over Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, Italy, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Morocco, Pakistan, Russia, Spain, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.



I haven't bothered to read them, but the fact that people in all these countries are noticing them is saying something, don't you think?

1. It's not just NATO countries reporting them.

2. It's suggesting that chemtrails are being sprayed all over the world, does that make sense? I mean come on Bangladesh? Do you believe they would spray chemttrails over Bangladesh?




posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by ::.mika.::
 


That an interesting question mika.

The reason for this, is due to the air near the equator being warmer than normal. I live in Darwin at the top of Australia, and due to the warmer upper air we have here, we dont see many contrails

Here's an example



500.0 5870 -4.9 -11.9 58 3.09 145 11 327.0 337.7 327.6
487.0 6077 -6.5 -10.1 76 3.66 140 12 327.5 340.1 328.2
473.0 6303 -7.9 -13.0 66 2.98 135 13 328.6 338.9 329.1
449.0 6708 -10.3 -18.3 52 2.03 149 12 330.4 337.7 330.8
437.0 6916 -10.9 -16.9 61 2.34 156 12 332.2 340.6 332.7
422.0 7182 -12.9 -17.4 69 2.32 165 11 333.0 341.4 333.5
400.0 7590 -15.9 -18.2 82 2.29 140 6 334.2 342.5 334.7
399.0 7609 -16.1 -18.2 84 2.30 140 6 334.2 342.5 334.7
381.0 7954 -18.3 -23.3 65 1.55 141 6 335.8 341.5 336.1
372.0 8132 -19.7 -22.3 80 1.73 141 6 336.2 342.6 336.6
364.0 8293 -20.1 -27.1 54 1.15 142 6 337.8 342.1 338.0
359.0 8395 -20.9 -25.4 67 1.36 142 6 338.0 343.1 338.3
357.0 8436 -20.7 -29.7 44 0.92 142 6 338.8 342.4 339.0



The first lot of data is from a weather balloon that I released this morning, notice the temperature at 400.0hPa (first column) is -15.9 (third column)

Now here's some data from a European weather balloon



500.0 5680 -21.7 -22.8 91 1.23 280 58 306.5 310.7 306.8
489.0 5844 -22.7 -23.9 90 1.14 280 59 307.2 311.1 307.5
486.0 5889 -23.0 -24.2 90 1.12 280 59 307.4 311.2 307.6
458.0 6322 -25.9 -27.3 88 0.89 280 67 309.1 312.1 309.2
454.0 6385 -26.4 -27.8 87 0.86 280 68 309.2 312.2 309.4
426.0 6840 -29.8 -31.7 83 0.64 275 68 310.6 312.8 310.7
405.0 7202 -32.5 -34.8 80 0.50 280 70 311.6 313.4 311.6
402.0 7255 -32.9 -35.2 80 0.48 280 70 311.7 313.4 311.8
400.0 7290 -33.1 -35.4 80 0.47 280 70 311.9 313.6 312.0
386.0 7537 -34.9 -37.1 80 0.41 275 68 312.8 314.2 312.8
374.0 7756 -36.5 -38.7 80 0.36 275 72 313.5 314.8 313.6
350.0 8215 -39.8 -42.0 79 0.27 275 71 315.0 316.1 315.1
349.0 8235 -39.9 -42.1 79 0.27 275 71 315.1 316.1 315.1


Now notice at 400.0hPa in the european balloon.....its at -33.1 which is much colder than the air here. The reason the air is colder here, is because the temperature at the surface, is much colder in europe, than it is near the tropical areas of the world.

For contrails we need temperatures below approx -35 near a planes crusing altitudes. So, if a plane crusing over the European balloon launcher was at a height of 350.0hPa, it would form a contrail. If a plane was crusing at a height of 350.0hPa near wear I launched my balloon, the air wouldnt be cold enough to form a contrail.

Another factor is, there is much more air traffic over Europe, than there is over India, and South East Asia, so contrails will be more likely observed in high traffic areas

Hope that helps



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Really? That image??

Some totted-up joke of a photo-shopped, false color picture of Ben Affleck holding a animated image of a fake newspaper?

Is that from Mad magazine, or the 'Onion' perhaps??

Again, just in the last few pages we have seen someone claim that actual photos of WWII airplanes' contrails is just 'smoke'....Ever been to an airshow, anyone? Like, when the 'Confederate AirForce' comes to town. They fly the vintage airplanes...and they do NOT smoke like that.

Anyone old enough to remember the good old days of classic skywriting?

Hint: If you're under 30, then you may have to 'wiki' it or something, on the interwebs.

The technique required great skill, it was really an art form. Conditions had to be just right...light winds, blue sky (obviously). The stuff was sprayed at low altitudes (say, 3000 feet) or higher, as needed, to avoid the thermals. The stuff did NOT fall to the ground, it dissipated, it spread out and disappeared. BUT, since it was at a low altitude, clouds would not form around the particulates, as happens in high-altitude contrails.

Some contrails morph into cirrus clouds....that is about it. Cirrus clouds drift together, merge, change, sublimate, or persist. So far, never have I seen a cirrus cloud fall to earth. SO, if you are directly beneath a cirrus cloud, don't worry...those nasty unburned hydrocarbons won't get ya!



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Anyone old enough to remember the good old days of classic skywriting?

Hint: If you're under 30, then you may have to 'wiki' it or something, on the interwebs.

The technique required great skill, it was really an art form. Conditions had to be just right...light winds, blue sky (obviously). The stuff was sprayed at low altitudes (say, 3000 feet) or higher, as needed, to avoid the thermals. The stuff did NOT fall to the ground, it dissipated, it spread out and disappeared. BUT, since it was at a low altitude, clouds would not form around the particulates, as happens in high-altitude contrails.


Thats a very good point weedwhacker

It proves that even with light winds, things can be dispersed, including even the minute ice crytsals that from the cirroform clouds



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
The food chain and water supply would be the most accessible and direct means to "poison" the population, and wouldn't require such a difficult and implausible method of delivery. How hard would it be to slip an extra ingredient into the hormones, pesticides, chlorine, and fluoride that currently get pumped into our foodstuffs?


Thats what Ive been saying for a while


If I was a government nasty, out to harm the general population, the most effective way would be thorughthe food and water supply....particularly the water supply, which could be done quickly and covertly (its not like the water is very well guarded)

Much better than releasing something at 30,000ft and navigating a numerous range of wind speeds and directions

Good post



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Thanks for this well thought out and informed post.
It points out all the very obvious flaws in the chamtrail theroy as well as some of the more complex facts. Thank you for saying what I wish i could have said for some time now. Your way of putting this into words is amazing. S+F



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 02:58 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
reply to post by defcon5
 

Is crop spraying a form of chemtrailing ? Hell yes . deny that .



Nobody denied that crop spraying uses chemicals

And, crop sprqaying is under taken at a low altitude of a couple of hundred feet (to avoid cross contamination), over....well.....crops



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Are you really going to try and convince us that luggage handlers are bound by official secrets ?

Do you really think the military is going to file a flight plan for craft that are above top secret ?

Truth is its the other way round. Its the civvy craft that are deliberately kept in tight corridors so that military craft can range more widely. Pretty obvious safety precaution when you have miltary kit flying the skies at mach 3 plus AT LEAST THESE DAYS. Hell , our modified F111's kicked your f22's asses last time they came to the northern territory to play war games .

No mate , I know the denial culture is very strong in the US , particularly when their high tech is falling flat on its face along with the economy .



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
reply to post by defcon5
 

Yeah right . The truth is you are not on a need to know clearance so you dont get the inside line. Your just another dumb civvy probably loading luggage at LAX .



Just one other thing too mate

We all know you claim to be involved or your family is involved with high ranking air force official, and the species of alien you claim to be, provided the RAAF F-111's with what you claim is cloaking technology....but that does not give you the right to call Defcon a "dumb civvy"

Its one thing to challenge his knowledge, but its uneccesary to label him as a "dumb civvy"

Remember the mods said a few posts ago that civility and decorum is required at all times

Just a reminder so you dont make that mistake in the future

[edit on 17/3/2009 by OzWeatherman]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
this is interesting, though i really never looked into this much before

MEGASPRAYER









[edit on 17-3-2009 by werk71]

[edit on 17-3-2009 by werk71]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


So by your own logic ,the only difference between chem and crop spraying is.....altitude . CORRECT , thanks for clarifying the point for me .

There are no black and white definitions regarding chemical spraying .The question is , what is the purpose ? The answer is there are many different purposes . In nam ,it was deforestation . In the midwest farming belt it was pest control. My uncle was crop spraying his sugar cane crops in barbados before he got recruited in to the RAF .

Its nothing new , he was a Spitfire Pilot all through ww2 , one of the few to get through in one piece . So mate ,you can deny all you want but I know what I know and have seen with my own eye's .

All to often ,good men in the service are constrained by corrupt pollies who are in turn the pawns of power mad ,in bred megalomaniacs . sad but true .



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


So by your own logic ,the only difference between chem and crop spraying is.....altitude . CORRECT , thanks for clarifying the point for me .


Umm, noooooo

I said crop spraying occurs at low altitude, I never said the were related to what you call as chemtrails, which are really contrails



So mate ,you can deny all you want but I know what I know and have seen with my own eye's .


Which is what you chemtrailers say all the time, yet you provide no evidence to back up your claims....the only reason you think you see chemicals being sprayed, is because you dont understand the workings of the upper atmosphere or even basic chemistry.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:44 AM
link   
This Website explains what the Hype is About

im not saying i believe it, i only provide the information...

AEROSOL OPERATION
CRIMES & COVER-UP



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
Do you really think the military is going to file a flight plan for craft that are above top secret ?

Truth is its the other way round. Its the civvy craft that are deliberately kept in tight corridors so that military craft can range more widely. Pretty obvious safety precaution when you have miltary kit flying the skies at mach 3 plus AT LEAST THESE DAYS. Hell , our modified F111's kicked your f22's asses last time they came to the northern territory to play war games .

No mate , I know the denial culture is very strong in the US , particularly when their high tech is falling flat on its face along with the economy .


No, they aren't kept in tight corridors. They are allowing free navigation for flights to pick their own flight path for the best conditions. So there goes that idea.

I used to work on the F-111 at Pease AFB. There is no way that an F-111 would kick an F-22's ass. A lot of them don't even carry a fire control radar for air to air missiles. The F-111 was called a fighter, but it was like the F-117, with a very limited air to air capability. Later models were capable of carrying the AIM-7, but originally they could only carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder IR missile. Not to mention that if you're talking about them being in Australia, the F-22 hasn't even been there yet. It hasn't gone farther than Guam and England to date.

As to civilians working at an airport, no it's not "national secrets" but we are still privy to some information that is considered sensitive or classified. Most of the machines that I serviced, I'm still not allowed to talk about how they work, and I haven't worked at an airport in 4 years.

Working on the ramp, you learn what is and isn't usual on an aircraft. You have to, so you know where the dangerous areas are. You would notice if there were odd nozzles somewhere on the plane.

[edit on 3/17/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



Then you should be fimiliar with OPSEC.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by reconpilot
 


reconpilot....OK, so you fly the F111? With the RAAF...you've established that much.

here's the rub: Many 'chemtrailers' attempt to claim that commercial passenger and cargo airliners are doing this so-called 'spraying'.

THAT is the gist of the argument --- as a former airline pilot, I call nonsense.

I have repeatedly, however, allowed as to the possiblity of Miitary activity on this subject. Obviously, I would have no knowledge about it.

Speaking of airline pilots....your friend mentioned a 'Global' temperature rise post 9/11? When you said 2 degrees, I assume you mean C, so that's about 3 degrees F.

Now, I won't be able to know if your pilot friend is a world-reknowned weather expert, or maybe a hobbyist who likes to track global weather patterns....or just read it somewhere on the interwebs --- but, here's a question: Did all commercial flights get grounded in Australia on Sept 11th? In Europe? Russia? South America? Asia?

My point is this...groundings in the USA occured on 11 Sept, 2001. I had a 6-day trip on the 12th....obviously, I didn't go, but I still had to finish the end of the pairing. So, they dead-headed us down to Sao Paolo on the 15th. If airliners were grounded for three days, in the USA, how would that affect the entire world's average temps?



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


No. the problem is you have a need to deny anything that you cannot explain . A very human weakness....

If you pour a bunch of thrity weight in your petrol tank and rive your car up the road you will get a lot of blue smoke Yeah ?

If you put impurities in to any combustion engine or turbine you can create a chemical soup that is no longer just water vapour , YES ?

So faced with climate change and all the horrors implicate in a total melt down of the polar caps, how would you slow down the effects of solar radiation ? Put up a barage of shading particulates ?

Now im not saying there is just one purpose to chemical spraying. There are many purposes depending on the intended outcome. You also neglect to mention electrostatic effects on weather and particulate dispersion.
high voltage EM fields ALSO cause condensation .

So instead of just trying to slam the door on peoples common sense observations ,maybe you should get off your metoerological high horse and ask yourself WHY military tankers are criss crossing the sky with chemical crud in populous areas in the US.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


No. the problem is you have a need to deny anything that you cannot explain . A very human weakness....


Except, of course, in this case it can be easily explained



So faced with climate change and all the horrors implicate in a total melt down of the polar caps, how would you slow down the effects of solar radiation ? Put up a barage of shading particulates ?


But so-called chemtrails casue warming - hence why research is undertaken to find a way to reduce them occuring



So instead of just trying to slam the door on peoples common sense observations ,maybe you should get off your metoerological high horse and ask yourself WHY military tankers are criss crossing the sky with chemical crud in populous areas in the US.


Common sense is that f you see aircraft criss crossing the sky producing something which looks and acts like a contrail and you know there should be hundreds (7,500 a day over the UK) of commercial airliners criss crossing the sky and that they should be producing contrails, maybe what you're seeing are those commercial airliners producing contrails?

Why assume anything else? Surely that's the question?



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join