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.
Originally posted by Mindmelding
Correction, a subject you are quite passionate against. You're not defending any particular position of substance, you're always debating against chemtrails.
This categorises you as a skeptic and a debunker, because you don't add, you subtract from the topic.
Originally posted by Mindmelding
reply to post by neformore
Oh sure, you bring up facts, but it's the correlation to the actual topic that is invalid.
I'll give an example, the constant push of contrail science when people talk about chemtrails. It's irrelevant. We all know there is a science behind contrails. We all know the finer aspects of condensation. We've all gone through it.
None of the above invalidates chemtrails. Two different if visually similar phenomenons. Because people don't accept the fact that we could have this fac simile if chemtrails are real regardless of the validity of contrail science, the debunking is invalid.
It's not your science that is bad, I'm moderately impressed sometimes, it's the correlation that is unsustainable because we end up always talking about two different things.
Besides, you guys always gloss over the official news reports, the weathermen reports, the documents about the science and you always seem to want to classify weather modification as "something else", which it is not, it is chemtrails. We don't need any weather modification.
In short, you and a few other skebunkers (hehe) try to pass the idea that the chemtrails are another phenomenon, contrails. This is the gist of your argument, you don't add much else, except trying to classify weather modification as something else. It dosen't correlate to what most people are experiencing and I have the feeling most of you do it as a thought experiment.
If that last sentence is true you need to get out more.
Wow, I beg to differ with you on Grid patterns a Contrail will dissapear in 5 minutes. They dont stick around for the next few planes to fly by.
Originally posted by Mindmelding
I know because I've been under them for years, because I remember what the sky was before this started happening in the mid to late 90's.
In 2007 29.5 million commercial flights took place. Thats roughly 80,000 flights a day globally. Add to that military traffic (which on global terms I estimate will be less than 1% of the commercial flights figure) and Thats an awful lot of things in the sky.
Air travel has increased an average of 4.38% a year in the past 20 years (Heres the maths, in 2007, there were 29,500,000 commercial flights, that means that in 1987, there were "only" 12,596,447 flights - less than half the 2007 figure). More planes = more chances for contrails = more observation of contrails. Its not rocket science (its meteorology!)