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: 13
43
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:06 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....


I have explained it, (why contrails persist), the problem is that none of the chemtrailers have tried to debunk the raw data yet. Like I said before contrails are fromed by sublimation, debunk sublimation, then debunk the meteorlogical factor of supersaturation, then debunk the winds in the upper troposphere....



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 .


Do you have a source for this

If you do, then I guess the hundreds of years of meteorology, and the billions of years that the earth has experienced weather....are completely wrong



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.


:shk:

And maybe you should rsearch factual meteorological data, and observations, plus the dynamics of clouds, and the processes of sublimation and condensation




posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


No I dont fly the F111 . Dont put words in my mouth to try and undermine my arguments .I know its a popular trick with you guys when you are smarting under pressure .

The f111 was essentailly a rip off of the orginal tsr 2 program in the UK.
I had a number of relatives who were part of the tsr's design team .

The americans have a history of stealing technology from europe then claiming it as their own .

The point the airline pilot was making to me was this. Pollution in the atmosphere has a shading effect . It partially alleviates solar radiation.
his point was that with vastly reduced air traffic ,post 9-11 , global air temps rose significantly . Common sense unless you have never operated an umbrella before . You do know what an umbrella is dont you .....?

So dont try that old intel trick of spinning my words out of context to deflect from the prescience of my arguments .

A retired RAAF officer told me about the highly modified and upgraded australian f111's succes against your crappy over rated raptors .

no its not official ,to save face with our 'defense partner' , but hey ,when your dealing americans and their ego's you have to indulge them and roll with the punches .



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Debunkers crack me up. Just like their ridiculous claims that the water vapor in contrails is the same physical process that forms clouds, they have a hard time distinguishing between a WW II piston engine and a modern jet turbine.


And:


Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
All the photos of WWII aircraft show smoke coming out of the engines... You will notice that any photo provided doesn't show it from the same vantage point that all the verified 'Chemtrail' photos are from... Kind of like comparing apples to oranges.... I guess you wouldn't notice...


Exhaust is particulates are black, and you can see it clearly when they are at low altitude (or out of a car exhaust, same thing, pretty much). In fact, from what you are saying you seem to think all the steam coming from old steam trains is also smoke. Only some of it is.

Now, sure, a piston engine does differ from a jet, but the idea is extremely similar in that they both burn hydrocarbons. All hydrocarbon combustion, assuming perfect conditions, will have something like C2H6 and some O2 go in, and have some CO2 ands H2O go out. And the water that comes out condenses very quickly, in the 223K air or so, into a contrail, regardless of engine type. The only difference will be that jets put out a lot more and probably a bit hotter too, hence a larger cloud from it.

And as to the area the picture was taken from, I'm pretty sure this is from the ground.



Either that or St Pauls cathedral has some antigravity technology hidden away.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


There you go about RAW DATA again. BUT RAW DATA MEANS NOTHING UNTIL IT IS ANALYSED AND INTERPRETED . Intelligently .

So go ahead and fill your car with two stroke mix and get back to me with the RAW DATA .



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


There you go about RAW DATA again. BUT RAW DATA MEANS NOTHING UNTIL IT IS ANALYSED AND INTERPRETED . Intelligently .


I provided raw data and I interpreted it....see the opening post

Yet, nobody challenged it



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by reconpilot
 


recon....you have the word pilot in your name....wasn't using some 'intel' trick on you (whatever that is) I simply iinferred from your OWN post!

I think I asked a few valid questions, and you responded with vitriol.

So, I'll ask again, how does an 'umbrella' (your word) over the Continental USA affect the eniter World's average temperature?

Maybe I'm just too logical....but it sure sounded as if YOU had the necessary clearances and info to speak to this issue, without violating any oath of secrecy. It was the impression I got.

Any response to my queries?



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Ho hum , another disgruntled grunt who has no idea how far behind the eight ball American technology really is.

But you go on believing in your gov and military hierarchy if you want to. You were called in here because your perps need to pour cold water on this thread before it gets even more interesting.....

Fact is your gov does not have the technology to upgrade the 'outdated' like we do . fact is your gov signed up with the wrong mob when it came to technology exchange .

fact is our outdated f111's flogged the ass of a whole squadron of your raptors . Yeah ,its embarrasing i know..... but what can you do?

You buggers sabotaged Concorde because you were afraid we would retrofit magnet runners to it and have a fourty year old 'dinosaur' become a world beater again . yanks.....

Of course we do have more advanced fighters too.....

What do they look like ?

Well what would you like them to look like ?.We can give you a choice .

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Please address the issue at hand and refrain from attacking your fellow members.

[edit on 3/17/2009 by maria_stardust]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Thank you OzWeatherman, for another very interesting chemtrails/contrails thread. I admire your patient & logical approach to this topic.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by reconpilot
 


LMAO.

F-22's have NEVER flown against the F-111. F-22 has NEVER came to Australia, even at joint exercises such as Red Flag, the F-111 will always be on the same side as the F-22; blue forces. That is besides the point; F-111 is not even designed to fly against the F-22; it, the F-111, is essentially an out dated bomber that needs massive F-18 SEAD/DEAD support in order for it to be even remotely competitive in this world. Our HUG'd HORNETS with newer munitions such as JASSM and JSOW are MORE THAN capable of filling the role of the F-111, as its range is effectively constrained by the F-18. AF-18 pilots have commented that the F-111 is slow and couldn't turn... not something you want to be coming from a HORNET of all aircraft.


By the way, DACT is not for "my airplane kicked your airplane's butt". That is entertaining, but silly; and defies the whole purpose of these exercises. Educate themselves, and stop paying attention to whoever you've been listening too; they're obviously NOT current. 1940's way of comparing aircraft capabilities doesn't always work.

Could you outline one instance, of say, a single plane, any plane, being better than the F-22 at what the F-22 is designed to do? Please? You're a pilot? In terms of sensors it's VASTLY superior than anything. In terms of avionics it's VASTLY superior to anythng. In terms of kinematics it's VASTLY superior to anything. What does that leave? UFO's? Advanced fighters like what?

I have a question. What planet are you on? Just curious.

Also, the idea you are actually a pilot, even a private pilot; is laughable, at best. Your 'family' has security clearances? Yeah? And? Your dad? Also, on the F-22, you ever talked to, Tom Burbage, Air Vice-Marshall John Harvey, Maj. General David Heinz, Paul Metz? I would suggest educating yourself on the capabilities of these aircraft in question, before commenting on them.

You spoke to an airline pilot? Are airline pilots climatologists now? How come NO airline pilots I've spoken too don't tell me about chemtrails, or about changing temperatures? NOT denying weather changed after 9/11, that's a FACT, but airline pilots? Riiiiiiiiggggggghhhhhht. Maybe we could ignore actual data and talk to pilots instead.


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.

Military tankers? Like what? The RAAF's single KC-30 and few 707's (if they're even flying still)? Or is the story going to change to UFO's? Or would it be some secret military base in the Australian desert? I'll take a guess; you'll reply with me putting words in your mouth (as usual). Nope; but other than that, they are the expected answers.

[edit on 17/3/2009 by C0bzz]

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Please address the issue and refrain from attacking fellow members.

[edit on 3/17/2009 by maria_stardust]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot

The point the airline pilot was making to me was this. Pollution in the atmosphere has a shading effect . It partially alleviates solar radiation.


Some pollution does. Sulphur particles for example. But these are not visible from the ground, which is why we never noticed the increases suphur emission from Europe and N America producing all that acid rain in the 70s
The issue of 'solar dimming' is well known

www.sciam.com...

Mind you, maybe there are less reports of contrails from Asia because no-one can see them through all the pollution?

news.bbc.co.uk...

What's interesting is that latest research suggests this pollution may cause more warming than cooling in some areas.

So however you look at it, chemtrails are not there to prevent GW.

What is visible from the ground however are ice crystals. They're bigger for a start and they sparkle and shine ...... And these cause a net warming.



his point was that with vastly reduced air traffic ,post 9-11 , global air temps rose significantly


No, the diurnal range increased. It was warmer by day and cooler by night. And this was only across the USA.

Cirrus clouds - whether natural or manmade - have a net warming effect overall. Although they do slightly reduce daytime temps they increase them at night and in winter, especially in higher latitudes.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Below is a post i made in a recently popular thread called "Why are so many people calling contrails, Chemtrails?"

The simple fact is from the early 1940's to the late 1970's the British government has admitted to putting what they say is 'harmless' chemicals in the atmosphere via planes for national security purposes, the reasons are explained below. It is undeniable that these are CHEMTRAILS. I'm not arguing that the chemtrails were harmful but the British government did operate in a clandestine manner which is DISTURBING.





Applying logic to the existence of chemtrails is quite easy. The military is still in existence. The military create biological and chemical weapons to be administered via planes. Therefore it would not be out of the question for them to study wind and air patterns over there own nations using what they perceive to be harmless chemical substitutes for said airborne chemical/biological weapons in case such a weapon would be used over there own home soil.

For me i just wonder what clandestine military/government operations are going on in the interest of national security aka in your best interests, that you will find out about in 60 years time.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 07:50 AM
link   

ENOUGH



Comments like this


Originally posted by reconpilot
You were called in here because your perps need to pour cold water on this thread before it gets even more interesting.....


Are Ad-hominem, uncalled for and most defintely NOT the way we conduct business on ATS.

And they stop NOW please.

By all means, debate the subject matter - but the moment you start going after individial posters in this matter is the moment you cross the line.

I do not care which side of the fence you sit on in this argument, on ATS you discuss it with civility and decorum not with half-baked accusations, insinuations and innuendo.

I hope thats clear, because no further warnings on the matter will be given. YOU are responsible for your own posts.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by blahdiblah

The simple fact is from the early 1940's to the late 1970's the British government has admitted to putting what they say is 'harmless' chemicals in the atmosphere via planes for national security purposes, the reasons are explained below. It is undeniable that these are CHEMTRAILS.


But they are not what people today claim to be chemtrails. And that's the point.

Maybe such chemical spray tests do take place? It wouldn't at all surprise me. But we would not see them any more than we did in the 60s.

Of course, if they were taking place, how handy if those who suspect them are constantly distracted into looking the other way, so to speak?



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
OK, I have been reading all about the evil plot to poison people by spreading chemicals out of planes. Some of you have stated that project evergreen is the start of the evil empire and you require proof of con trails existing prior to 1989 or whatever. How about this?
Proof that whatever is being sprayed on you is for your own good.

Now stick that in your tank and spray it.
Debunk away boys.

[edit on 17-3-2009 by network dude]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by reconpilot
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 .

Well...
First off as it clearly states in my profile I live in Florida, and LAX is in CA, so another stirke against your ignorance. Secondly I was a Ramp Suprevisor, meaning I ran the entire ramp serivce for an airline, and I had HIGER clearance then TSA's do. TSA's are not allowed to have ramp access as there are three levels and I held level two while they hold level one, only Airport police and Aviation Authority personnel hold level three.


Originally posted by reconpilot
Last time I questioned an airline pilot on the subject he answered by saying that after 9-11 when airtraffic was stopped for weeks on end, ,global temps went up by an average 2 degree's .

Yeah, that was from the contrails stopping, nothing to do with Chemtrails.


Originally posted by reconpilot
well perhaps you may like to tell me if YOU THINK climate change is still an illusion as the ice caps are melting and the sea is rising .

Climate change has nothing to do with whether or not chemtrails exist, but it might be related to contrails.


Originally posted by reconpilot
Another close relative ,who is a retired air vice marshall did express his disgust at elements of the program but would not be drawn anymore on the subject since he is still in the loop and cannot risk political harrasement .

AN air marshell has no idea what goes on on the ramp, as they deal with passenger security, not ramp security.


Originally posted by reconpilot
So laugh all you want . Truth is though that for those of us who know whats going on, your desperate painting over the facts is far more telling .

Believe me I am laughing my butt off.


Originally posted by reconpilot
Is crop spraying a form of chemtrailing ? Hell yes . deny that .

Nope, it does not fit the Chemtrail criteria, It does not form clouds, it does not linger, and it is not done at high altitudes.


Originally posted by reconpilot
Its also increasingly obvious that mods do come up with excuses to censor when posters get to close to the truth .

More likely the mods have some common sense and don't buy the chemtrail BS.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 08:38 AM
link   

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

I was not a luguage handler, I was a ramp supervisor. For you laymen that means I was in charge of an entire airline ramp, and their personnel. I signed for my aircraft and was responsible for them when the pilot was not in command or they were not flagged for maintenance. The next position higher then mine was ramp station manager, which is held by one person per airline.


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

Yep they are required to under federal law...



Originally posted by reconpilot
our modified F111's kicked your f22's asses last time they came to the northern territory to play war games .

Oh, you mean an American aircraft beat another American aircraft... Not Shocking Americas aircraft kick the rest of the worlds butts as shown in several wars now.

[edit on 3/17/2009 by defcon5]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   
I have noticed a pattern for the chem trailers. Now before the mods jump all over this and inform me that this is a conspiracy web site, I know that and even beileve in a few conspiracies myself. The chem trailers are the same ones who take the extreem side of any conspiracy. Meaning they think everying is a conspiracy. Isn't is possible that not everything that exists is not a government conspiracy? Is it possible that not everyone is out to get you? By the way, I don't get enough take home pay to work for the government. If you want proof, I will refer you to my wife.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


Are you referring to cloud seeding? The hydrologists shoot this stuff in to the clouds in arid regions of the US to produce rain. I don’t know which chemical they use though. I believe it to be isolated to clouds and wouldnt leave a chemtrail and hot high enough to leave a contrail.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by wonderworld
 


China has also been a big proponent of cloud seeding.

With a population of more than 1.3 billion, China requires vast amounts of water. The government practices cloud seeding to try to produce rain for farmers, stave off drought, clear away air pollution and smog, fill water basins and, of course, produce a picture-perfect opening Olympic ceremony.


source



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join