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.

 

Chemtrails Revealed!!!: What they are, who is doing it and why.

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by 911stinks
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 




Thats statement refers to clear sky conditions, prior to any observed contrail. When you have numerous planes flying at around the same flight pattern, producing contrails, you have excess moisture added into the environment. In other words, numerous planes have the ability to saturate the environment.


Please, point me to where in the link it says that. Or is this just your interjection? And if so, what do you base your logic on?


There's more to meteorology and atmospheric science than is contained in one simplified article on the internet





You are suggesting that aircraft inject water into the air.


Yes. Just like cars do. And factory chimneys.

The only difference is that at the altitude aircraft fly it's rather cold so the water vapour freezes and forms ice crystals


But the truth is, water is drawn to the contrail (chemtrail). This suggest excessive particulate matter in the exhaust.


Yes, this also happens. Just like you car, aircraft exhaust, as well as water vapour, contains numerous particulates from the fuel. These act as nuclei for even more ice crystals to form.


This is backed up by countless NASA missions like SOAR and CIRRUS and CONTRAIL and on and on studying contrails, and the particulate matter in them. You can't find out what the particulate matter consists of, but it is in the 2.5 nm size. Smaller than dust basically.


Exactly! Now you're starting to understand contrails



Add that with the rainbow sheen being seen in the sky


You mean irridesence or irisisation? It's been around as long as rainbows.


.... increased cloud cover (blue skies when planes are grounded)


Exactly what we've been saying for years - aircraft make clouds! Like these:





And we don't like it. But the only way to stop it is to ground all aircraft. And the only way to do that is for an even bigger eruption in Iceland. Come on Katla!




posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Northwarden
... we are finding aluminum in the snows of Scottish Mountains


Care to provide a reference?

Of course, we do have aluminium smelting plants in the Scottish Highlands .....



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Northwarden
 

Aluminum is one of the most common elements on the planet. It's a by product of various industrial processes.

10 years? Hmmmm.

The legislation during the administration of George Bush actually allowed an increase in industrial metallic particle emission, beginning in 1995, long after he would be out of office. [GHW Bush created the Council on Competitiveness, a front for industry and manufacturing to head off EPA sanctioned environmental restraints. It was overseen by Dan Quayle. The Council altered standards and issued operating permits to over 35,000 polluting businesses. Quayle’s Council reviewed EPA administrator William Reilly’s Clean Air Act proposals and added a provision to allow manufacturers and chemical companies to increase pollution levels without public review.

www.trufax.org...



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by 911stinks
 

If particulate matter is required for the formation of ice crystals, what is the source of cirrus clouds?

Particulates are not required to trigger the formation of ice crystals in saturated air. The added moisture in the exhaust is sufficient to begin the process .

[edit on 4/30/2010 by Phage]


Ever wonder why the first weather modification experiment in the 50's was called Project Cirrus?



General Electric's scientist Bernard Vonnegut invented cloud seeding with silver iodide.
www.nature.com...
scholar.google.com...
scholar.google.com...



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by 911stinks
 

Cloud seeding is done in cumulus clouds. Cumulus clouds consist of water droplets, not ice. The purpose of cloud seeding is to induce those existing droplets to coalesce into large enough drops to fall.

Cloud seeding has nothing to do with cirrus clouds. Or "chemtrails".



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by 911stinks
 


As you didnt bother checking my links on the previous post...here they are again


www.atoptics.co.uk...

www.atoptics.co.uk...

www.atoptics.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Northwarden
 


My God!

Talk about seeing a bunch of telephone poles, and calling it a forest...!

Your first one? The "aluminum soap"?

As it states, it's a de-misting additive PATENT (can you show where it's actually being used?) that is designed to (hopefully) make the fuel less susceptible to misting, in CRASHES, or other events where the fuel is in a place where it's not supposed to be (I.E., the tanks, or burned in the engines). It is for the RAW fuel, and as I said, in case of accidents.

The additive (IF it were to be used) would NOT make it through the engine combustion cycle. AND, just because they use the word "aluminum" it seems to conjure up an image in YOUR mind, since you also linked to "nano particles of aluminum", as used in a ROCKET fuel?


Really, try reading with a keen eye, sometimes.


Fuel de-misting inhibitors---

There was a test conducted in the 1980s, a deliberately crashed old Boeing 720...was equipped for R/C. The test failed, the additive didn't perform as expected, but they still got some data from all of the crash test dummies, and cameras onboard. Makes for better designs of passenger seats, attempts at improving survivability of low-speed ("survivable") airplane crashes, better overhead bin latches, better fire-retardant materials...still, the fuel went up about as usually expect fuel to burn.

You just can't (yet, they haven't the technology) add something to fuel to make it less likely to ignite --- sorta defeats the whole PURPOSE of fuel. They make it to "thick", and it won't make it through the filters and pumps and fuel nozzles, because it HAS to be atomized to combust properly, within the engines. This is very, very basic stuff, here.

Anyway, rest of your post? Seemed to be in the same vein. Unrelated, and disconnected inferences. Wouldn't have happened to get that "info" from the so-called "chemtrail" websites, would you???


Here's (an overly dramatic...sheesh!) video from a TV serious that shows the R/C Boeing.



(The guy flying it lost control, at the last seconds...he struggled to accomplish the "landing". The whole 'radio control' set up was very difficult to operate, because of its complexity, and from the fact that it's harder to 'fly' an airplane when you're not in it. Also, faster you go, harder it becomes. Because you do not have the 'feel' for it, like you do when anboard).

SO, by 'losing' it, he hit the ground one wing low, then the target at the angle, which was NOT in the plan. (The B-707/720 was notorious for what we call "Dutch Roll" tendencies. It is a type of pilot-induced oscillation, left/right/left. Most pronounced at low speeds, like in the test).

Here's a better one, minus the dramatic music:



(fixed video link)

[edit on 30 April 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   


Soot particles emitted from aircraft jet engines may
possibly nucleate ice through heterogeneous nucleation (e.g.
M¨ohler et al 2005b), but soot particles may also become coated
with soluble species that make them act more like homogeneous
freezing nuclei (M¨ohler et al 2005b, 2005a, DeMott
et al 1999). Other studies have found that jet fuel exhaust
particles fail to nucleate ice below water saturation

2.2. Delivery mechanism
Since commercial airliners routinely fly in the region where
cold cirrus clouds exist, it is hoped that the seeding material
could either be (1) dissolved or suspended in their jet fuel
and later burned with the fuel to create seeding aerosol,
or (2) injected into the hot engine exhaust, which should
vaporize the seeding material, allowing it to condense as
aerosol in the jet contrail. The objective would not be to seed
specific cloud systems but rather to build up a background
concentration of aerosol seeding material so that the air masses
that cirrus will form in will contain the appropriate amount
of seeding material to produce larger ice crystals.

iopscience.iop.org...

Wonder what it's like to be an expert in your field, and have to lie about the science. What a crappy life that would be.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Source you were asking about; under Drinking Water Impact for the Scottish snow details.

www.speclab.com...

On that same note ...

Mt Shasta's Snow Hold 1200 x Normal Levels of Aluminum Due to Chemtrails!

www.project.nsearch.com...

Mt. Shasta, California, map.
mappery.com...

Here's a good example over how inter-connected problems are. High levels of aluminum in the atmosphere are also linked to more manmade genetic alterations of plant strains. They create the problem, then make a new problem to resist the first.

Aluminum Toxicity Tolerance (in plants) :
Enhancing the Al tolerance of crop plants by genetic engineering

www.plantstress.com...



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Well, Weedwhacker, I am done with speculation for now and hope to find more spectroanalysis reports in the future that we can determine the truths from. Aluminum isn't even measured in air quality indexes, and all official sites dedicated to industry almost unanimosly claim it is "harmless to the environment" - yet I can then go look at the info above studying aluminum poisoning in plants. It is obviously Such a problem to the environment that they are creating genetically engineered strains to resist it! Do you see a problem here? You can't trust the fluffed industry reports, so please don't tell me that "chemtrail" sites, fellow citizens concerned with our HEALTH, are not the ones to look at.

Why don't we switch chemicals for a while and have a look at sulpher, or NOx, which are assuredly found in regulated emissions.

Or better yet, the politics of geo-engineering. This was very intriguing. I don't want to overquote the article, even though I'd like to put all of it here.


Another prominent supporter of geoengineering proposals is none other than White House science czar John P. Holdren, a key Obama advisor who infamously co-authored a book in which he called for a “planetary regime” to enforce draconian population control measures such as forced abortion, infanticide and mandatory sterilization.


climaterealists.com...



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Northwarden
reply to post by Essan
 


Source you were asking about; under Drinking Water Impact for the Scottish snow details.

www.speclab.com...





The solute and particulate aluminum chemistry of a relatively unpolluted snowfall associated with a maritime airmass was measured .... to characterize background conditions for the Scottish Highlands.

Aluminum concentrations were compared to those found in a polluted black snowfall with a trajectory that originated over eastern Europe and to those levels found in seasonal snowpack.

The aluminum composition of particulate matter found within Scottish snow was 20,600 ppm in the inter-site survey, and 21,100 ppm in the intra-site survey.

For the black snow, the aluminum composition of particulate matter was 52,300 ppm. .


So there's rather less aluminium found in 'unpolluted' snowfall in Scotland compared with 'black' snowfall that results from pollution from eastern Europe.

All that proves is that there's more pollution in eastern Europe.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by 911stinks
 


Fascinating.

You and I can read the same abstract, yet YOU take it to mean it's actually being done (even though the date of the abstract is 2009) whereas I (and about 99.9% of the rest of the readers) can see quite clearly that it's positing potential methods of delivery. They are thinking of ways, in the future, of possibly doing these things.

Postulating on a 'delivery method' is very, very different than actually engineering and finding a way to make it work. Safely, and effectively.

Here, read it again:


....Since commercial airliners routinely fly in the region where
cold cirrus clouds exist, it is hoped that the seeding material
could either be (1) dissolved or suspended in their jet fuel
and later burned with the fuel to create seeding aerosol,
or (2) injected into the hot engine exhaust...


Note the part I emphasized: "it is hoped".

And, "the seeding material". (NOT...."The [XYZ Substance] material that we've already invented, developed, and tested. And now we want to see if it will worked as expected, in real-world environments.")


These are folks who are trying to consider all alternatives, SHOULD it become evident that Climate Change is (1) sufficiently dire as to require Human intervention, or (2) even viable, with current technologies.

That is the POINT of these papers. And these patents. Possible futue applications, in the event they become necessary.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by 911stinks
 

Seeding isn't necessary to produce cirrus clouds when the conditions are right (enhanced water vapor is enough) but yes, it might work. Or then again it might not. No one, including the authors of the article know. A lot of research remains to be done.
In any case, there is no reason to do it...yet. Global warming is not at a crisis point where such methods are called for.


5. Next steps?
More detailed modeling studies of cirrus microphysics, testing some of the physical principles and assumptions used here, as well as related laboratory studies, should be carried out. For example, in cirrus generated from mesoscale motions, their microphysical properties appear to be governed by the dynamics (K¨archer and Str¨om 2003). Modeling studies could be conducted to examine how significant the negative Twomey effect is in these cirrus. Another uncertainty is the ice sedimentation rate, a key factor determining how strong an effect this climate engineering approach is likely to have. The rate of increase in the ice particle fall velocity with respect to particle size, dV/dD where D = ice particle maximum dimension, decreases with increasing D. Hence this approach will be most effective for narrow PSD where the relative change in size after seeding is large. In situ measurements indicate such PSD are common when T < −40 ◦C, but these measurements may be contaminated by larger ice particles shattering at the inlet of the measurement probe, producing many small artifact ice fragments that are counted as natural ice crystals. This problem of ice particle shattering has cast a cloud of uncertainty over in situ PSD measurements and needs to be resolved to obtain reliable estimates of ice sedimentation rates, which depend strongly on the concentrations of small ice crystals (Mitchell et al 2008).

iopscience.iop.org...


[edit on 4/30/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


ROFL!!!!!!!!!


Best retort EVER! Thank you for that.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


In response to :


These are folks who are trying to consider all alternatives, SHOULD it become evident that Climate Change is (1) sufficiently dire as to require Human intervention, or (2) even viable, with current technologies.



The reason why global warming takes a second place to other discussions is because it is the poster-child of many a government. If you use some very critical reasoning here ...

This leads to a few observations:

- Geo-engineering, called 'absolute insanity" by David Suzuki, is the big answer to global warming, but it is only a masking solution since it does not actually nullify the CO2 in the atmosphere. The reverse is true, it helps cause it.

- Geo-engineering creates vast airplane traffic that adds NOx, and SO to the problem, and there is definate proof that aluminum, barium and other chemicals harmful to health are part of the problem.

- Geo-engineering was unsuccessfully lobbied as a bottom-up governance which avoided UN control, but is operating now from a nwo standpoint. The program critics are completely ineffective to alter the methods of application, or the scope.

- Obama/Bush views in mind please. Al Gore was ready and willing to put himself in the same position as them, and to be privy to, and support of, all corporate interests and shadow govt. directives he was expected to follow. It's not just speculative. No-one runs for pres or gets that opportunity without some silent backing. Let's think about that because the perks don't end after an unsuccessful office run.

- Geo-engineering is now blocking out sunlight, which, contrary to any FDA/cancer-society claims, cures cancer and promotes good health; it drops chemicals that are harmful to all life; it adds to CO2 production (one 8H trans-atlantic flight causes as much pollution as 50 cars do in their entire 12 year average lifespan); the cover prevents moisture rising which is promoting mold, fungal, and bacteria growths to survive and thrive. Morgellons. Gattii.

- The cost of these flight programs is astronomical, let alone the scientists wages, let alone the institutional costs, let alone the propegandizing to market this concept to the public. There's also the spray costs, the ongoing program documentaries, the backrubs and political favour, and all other manners of circus and parade to ensure this program stays huge, profitable, and costly.

- Dropping iron in the ocean to promote the growth of CO2 fighting organisms? Very costly still, maybe some hope, what else are they up to, could be just a money-maker yet. Ie. Do nanobots need undersea minerals depots to replicate themselves?

What happens when we point out what is missing here. Do you see much news coverage of the slash and burn policies in Indonesia where satellites and spaceflights can actually see parts of the world burning from space? No, not too much coverage. How about India's coal-burning legacies, or clamping down on factory pollutions. Where are the state controls to outlaw fossil fuels actually headed, now that the States are being manipulated behind the scenes to stage a war on Iran? The quest for oil is on-going, and the beast never tires of lusting after the worlds resources, because it wants to control mankind, and that fuels their sadist desires.

Do you think the powers that be care if the world is destroyed? No, that's merely unfortunate. They probably have a space station, ufo tech, or deep earth/sea bunkers they can retire to. Global Warming is occurring, and could pose a danger to us, true enough. Look hard at the big picture, and you will clearly see that their counter-measures are not only promoting more global warming, in a one step backwards, two steps forward manner, but that they also don't have the environment in heartfelt concern either. I suggest we tear down their poster and keep looking at the flipside.

For a lark, research as much as you can on Albert Pike. Determine if he was a likeable fellow in the process, but most of all, pick his mind and see what you think about his many ideas. I think you'll solve a few modern riddles in the process.


Gore was one of the Atari Democrats who were given this name due to their "passion for technological issues, from biomedical research and genetic engineering to the environmental impact of the "greenhouse effect."

Wikipedia

Executive Intelligence Review
Al Gore: The Most Corrupt Man Never Elected President

www.larouchepub.com...




[edit on 30-4-2010 by Northwarden]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by 911stinks
 


Fascinating.

You and I can read the same abstract, yet YOU take it to mean it's actually being done (even though the date of the abstract is 2009) whereas I (and about 99.9% of the rest of the readers) can see quite clearly that it's positing potential methods of delivery.


Judging from the two pages of references, it;s already being done.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikemp44
 

my experience of installing process services in a smelter is that they cast at 720 deg C so what effect would much higher temps in a jet engine have on the substance.
Chlorine is also bulbled thru the melt prior to casting so where is this ending up.
In the furnaces they use a tonnes of pure carbon in block form as a sacrificial adode plus if using fossil fuels for a primary power source there are tonnes and tonnes of greenhouse gasses emitted unfortunately I dont have figures but it is a frightenly large number. Surely this would offset benefits identified? or is it a case of business as usual at any cost?


[edit on 30/4/10 by IMOVERHERE]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by IMOVERHERE
 


I think you make a very valid point, and if anything it really goes hand in hand with why I believe the portion of the article that explains that it is to protect semi-conductors from radiation, but is toxic.

Business as usual no matter the cost indeed.

I don't know if this is true, but I believe it is. Humans kill more humans than any other animal on the planet.



posted on May, 1 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by 911stinks
 



Judging from the two pages of references, it;s already being done.


You mean the abstract form 2009? Where I showed it to be ONLY an idea, a few suggestions?

Look at the part that is in your post, item #(2).

Read it very carefully, and try to understand the tense, there.

It is written, and referred to, in the future tense. In English, that is what we use to indicate a thought, or plan, that is being deemed as a possibility in the future.

Other English language tenses are 'present', and 'past'. (There are more variations, but this is enough explanation for now).

See it? Discussing how it might (and they seem to not even be sure IF it is possible) work to inject some sort of substance INTO the hot engine exhaust....

By mentioning that, they have given themselves an "out", in case there is no substance found that can be actually IN the fuel, as they suggest in #(1).

They are tossing about ideas, hoping (because then THEY get intellectual property rights, and therefore profits) one of those ideas can stick, and become viable.

To them (and they seem to NOT have any technical understanding of the difficulties in this), they think the "substance in the fuel" approach is easier to accomplish, because even THEY are aware of the complexity involved in trying to develop some sort of delivery system as they describe in #(2).

And, I can assure you, NO SUCH SYSYTEM is in place onboard passenger jetliners. Nada. Zilch. No way Jose'.

Those of us who actually fly, and have experience in such things, just laugh at the stupidity of most of those "chemtrail" sites that keep spreading this blather. We shake our heads at the fact there are such gullible people who believe it, and who don't take the time to actually go learn about the technical details, to see for themselves the problems.

BUT, some people believe in the Loch Ness Monster, too. Or, in the "Moon Landing Hoax".


Go figure.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 03:29 AM
link   
I'll add this here too for a little extra awareness.

Geo-engineering is going to take a crazy toll on the worlds health, but it may take up to 20 years for results to kick in. This is the primary spray they are using. This is going to increase ocean acidity too! Have a scan over what I dug up here if you like.


Aerosol formation

Primary aerosol formation, also known as homogeneous aerosol formation results when gaseous SO2 combines with water to form aqueous sulfuric acid (H2SO4). This acidic liquid solution is in the form of a vapor and condenses onto particles of solid matter, either meteoritic in origin or from dust carried from the surface to the stratosphere. Secondary or heterogeneous aerosol formation occurs when H2SO4 vapor condenses onto existing aerosol particles. Existing aerosol particles or droplets also run into each other, creating larger particles or droplets in a process known as coagulation. The larger the particles or droplets, the shorter their residence time in the stratosphere and the less effective they are at scattering visible sunlight.


From Geo-engineering, Wikipedia

From the provincial government of Manitoba, outlining Sulphur Dioxide health risks:


What are the effects of sulphur dioxide on people?

For longer exposures, sulphur dioxide levels above 0.15 ppm have been linked with increased hospital admissions for cardiac or respiratory illnesses. Long-term exposures to 0.027 to 0.031 ppm of sulphur dioxide with high levels of particulate matter in the air have been associated with an increase in respiratory illnesses in children.


www.gov.mb.ca...

But here's what the climate activists are saying ...

Can a Million Tons of Sulfur Dioxide Combat Climate Change?


A million tons of sulfur dioxide would be needed to begin the cooling process. Luckily SO2, a byproduct of coal-burning power plants, is a common industrial chemical.


www.wired.com...

Ontario's WSIB policy for workers affected by such illnesses ...


Policy

Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (COLD) in smelter workers is accepted as an occupational disease under sections 1(1)(n) and 122 of the Workers' Compensation Act as peculiar to and characteristic of exposure to Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) and particulates.

Guidelines

Acceptance of a claim is dependent on objective medical evidence of COLD and impaired pulmonary function.

A diagnosis of primary bronchiectasis, chronic upper respiratory disease, or primary asthma without the presence of COLD is not considered an acceptable basis to claim under this policy.

Entitlement criteria

Based on medical studies, claims for COLD with impairment shall be favourably considered when all of the following circumstances apply.

Nature of exposure

A clear and adequate history of exposure to any smelting process involving the production of sulphur dioxide and particulates as a significant by-product of the process must be established. This includes roasting, smelting, converting of metallic ores, and the secondary production of sulphuric acid.

Intensity of exposure

Sulphur dioxide exposure is established when levels of more than 5 parts per million (5 p.p.m.) are recorded repeatedly over the exposure period.

Duration of exposure

A minimum of 20 years established exposure.


And welcome to the world of tomorrow ...

Images of Sulphur Pollution

www.google.ca... p&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CB0QsAQwAw



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join