Chemtrailers: Your time is NOW!

reply to post by stars15k


Actually, those are not it at all...and since I have no ability to post any pics, I find it hard to see how you would know just exactly what i'm talking about. This was not clouds..at all, they didn't move in, they were just there...after the aircrafts left. I am uploading the photos to flickr now..will I be able to link them?

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Nkinga]

reply to post by Nkinga


Clouds do not always "move in". Sometimes they just form. Sometimes they are so thin you do not notice them. And contrails have been known for decades to spread from a trail to a cirrostratus layer.

Really they are clouds, until someone shows there is something in them to qualify as "chem-".

reply to post by AllSeeingI


Speaking of 'lame' attempts....(I point to the majority of this post)...

But, this bit needs to be called out:

Go get a pilot's license and then get back to me. Until then stop acting like you know what you are talking about.

Do you have an Airman's Certificate? (AKA 'pilot's license')

If so, what Class and Category? Any Ratings?

And, if so, what level of experience?

Because, IF you do, then your "belief" in so-called 'chemtrails' is astonishing.... :shk:

reply to post by Nkinga



now, something I want to say.......you have to really look at these pictures...zoom in on them if necessary, I have a canon camera (not sure which model) and could only zoom in so far. We live in Georgia, and as you can see, its a very clear blue day..and yes..there are clouds in the sky...at times, the areas I'm talking about look like its just pics of the clouds..but if you really focus in on it..you will see there is this light sheen in front of the clouds..almost like a mist? I would have chalked it up to fog or even smog..but we don't exactly have "smog" here in the northern part of Ga...and there was nothing on this day to make fog..no rainy weather or anything like that. Just this nice blue sky and a picnic. In all honesty, I would not just take pictures of the sky for the heck of it. I truly do not believe these to be clouds or anything in the atmosphere that occured naturally. Maybe i'm wrong..I'm just an average person...but....I know what I know..we were having a picnic in the back yard on a nice warm sunny blue sky day that was clear, and airplanes flew over (about 3..maybe 4) as well as helicopter..which in all honesty is not that weird, being that we have an airfoce base about 10 minutes away. But then, there was this sheen over the sky..it wasn't there before.

www.flickr.com...


[edit on 29-5-2010 by Nkinga]

reply to post by Nkinga


One way (way I use) for pics is to have the http:// link, copy/paste it into the posting, then use the "[img*] --- [/img*]" (DO NOT include the '*' inside the brackets...I put them there so the BB Code doesn't kick in)...tags at each end of the address.

I haven't yet, but ATS has a handy 'media' section wher you can upload photos, then link to them, and they will thus appear in the post.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK...I see you fixed the 'flickr' links....yes, those are perfectly normal cirrus clouds. A few look like possible altostratus, perhaps. Photos can be difficult to interpret, sometimes.

Altostratus

Some are what you'd commonly call "mare's tails" in shape...the thinnish, 'wispy' looking ones.

There is an almost infinite number of possible could shapes, check out any good book on meteorology and clouds, for further information.



[edit on 29 May 2010 by weedwhacker]

Back in the early 60's I used to watch the contrails over Southern Nevada. Las Vegas to be exact when it was still fairly small. I remember they did not fill the sky because they dissipated within thirty minutes or so. Now they fill the sky over where I live in Arizona and seem to last for hours before dispersing. Is it something in the contrails? Or is it that we are flying at higher altitudes now and the colder air allows the contrails to last longer?

[edit on 5-29-2010 by groingrinder]

Originally posted by standunited
reply to post by One Moment

 

"They" are spraying us and WE need to do something about it! Life expectancy for my children's generation is actually less!

Really?

Care to provide evidence that life expectency today in your country is less than it was 10, 50 or 100 years ago?

Unles you live in somewhere like Myanmar, in which case you may have a (totally irrelavent) point.

reply to post by groingrinder

Back in the early 60's...

That's the clue, there.

The design of the engines is very different, in the last decade especially. I've gone to some lengths to explain in another thread already, so won't repeat here.

ALSO, forty years later? A heckuva lot more flights, too....

Las Vegas is still a very busy place, for passing traffic overhead -- and so are many portions of Arizona.

This site: contrailscience.com... Should be required reading for ALL "chemtrail" believers....

Here, as I've said, I've described in posts here at ATS the difference seen due to high-bypass turbofan engine design...but perhaps this link will also help:

educate-yourself.org...

This looks promising, too, since it uses science and facts, not mumbo-jumbo 'junk' science and pseudoscience:

cat.inist.fr...



[edit on 29 May 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by Nkinga

There are no contrails or "chemtrails" in your pictures. You have taken pictures of normal cirrus clouds.

And yes, the weather changes without any help from man.

reply to post by Nkinga


Don't listen to the paid disinfo agents, those are clouds made by aircraft.

I don't call them clouds though, I call them white death.

It's really not even worth debating with them. All their answers are canned.

As long as people don't realize they are really poisoning us, they get paid.

No one has asked why they didn't sample particulate matter less than 5nm in the OP's link.

The seriously deadly poison is at the 2.5nm particulate size.

Particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter, which are easily inhaled deep within the lung system, have the greatest effect on human health.

In 1997, EPA added an air quality standard for particles with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM-2.5). These "fine particulates" are easily inhaled and can cause tissue damage, emphysema, bronchitis, and cardiovascular complications. Children, seniors, and individuals with pre-existing respiratory diseases are most susceptible to these health risks. Any secondary particulate formation is a major cause of reduced visibility and can produce acid rain.

www.fdlrez.com...

So, for example, todays particulate matter PM 2.5 level in Cleveland is;

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9f1fee23f68c.jpg[/atsimg]
www.airnow.gov...

Most likely certainly from Chemtrail activity in the area.

And still, 17% of the sample was metals. Yuk!

[edit on 29-5-2010 by OurskiesRpoisoned]

reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned


Funny....from the very link you "snipped"....a selective portion you chose, in your post. It is quite evident how editing, in order to attmept to 'prove' a point is in use, by the "chemtrail" advocates.

That is a prime example of 'junk' science --- intentionally using actual science facts in a misleading way.

HERE is more of the snippet, in context (your portion is in BOLD):

The size of particulate matter suspended in the air ranges from less than 0.1 micron in diameter up to 50 microns. There are 25,400 microns to 1 inch, or one-seventh the width of a human hair. Particles larger than 50 microns in diameter are too heavy to stay suspended in the air for long periods—they fall very close to their source before people can inhale dangerous amounts. Particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter, which are easily inhaled deep within the lung system, have the greatest effect on human health.

"have the greatest effect" on health. WHAT 'effect'? No, best not to say, just leave the implication dangling, and let people's imaginations run wild...because THAT fits neatly into the "chemtrail" pseudoscience garbage.

Let's read the rest, shall we?

Burning processes are the most common sources of particulate matter—fly ash (from power plants), carbon black (from gasoline and diesel engines), and soot (from slash burning, forest fires, fireplaces, and wood stoves).

Interrupting here, to emphasize the NEXT sentence in the paragraph....focus -----

Particles between 2.5 and 10 microns are usually associated with fugitive dust from wind-blown sand and dirt from roadways, fields, and construction sites.

Is that clear enough???

reply to post by Chadwickus

What? Are you actually suprised that there is soot in exhaust? Or that an engine made out of metal will exhaust metal particulates? Or that an engine that needs air to operate will exhaust crustal particulates (meaning that they're naturally occurring in the air)?

That is not surprising indeed, wich is why it is still beyond me why the data gathered in '96, or '98, from two planes, is so important to your thread.

I'm sure it doesn't take the testing of an actual contrail to predict what chemicals are supposed to be released, after combustion of the fuel.

So your only point is that someone should go and take samples.

I agree someone should go up there and take samples, but like I, and others have pointed out, it's not that simple.

Anyways here's an investigation with another approach:

A study conducted using the scientific method in the Houston area shows that (1) an abnormal type of aircraft contrail, one that is significantly more persistent, is being produced by some planes, and that (2) the planes that produce this type of contrail (some would call them chemtrails) are not registered air traffic for the area, but rather, unidentifiable jets. The meticulous study, by M. Steadham, was conducted using specialized software that tracks all air traffic (commercial, passenger, and private flights) which are required, under Instrument Flight Rules, to submit a flight plan to the regional air traffic control center.

The report's conclusion states : The goal of this research was to determine if there was a type of trail that was inconsistent with normal contrails, especially with regard to increased persistence. What was found is that highly persistent trails that last for many hours were seen above Houston, TX on a majority (60%) of observable days during the data collection period. However during this time period none of the 46 Flight Explorer confirmed contrails observed persisted for over 30 minutes and most contrails were under 30 seconds of persistence. Additionally it was discovered that the jets that were responsible for leaving highly persistent trails that last for hours did not ever appear on Flight Explorer and were documented for 8 separate instances, including one instance with two jets in formation. These unidentifiable jets were found to produce a contrail that was consistent with confirmed contrails during the periods when they weren't leaving highly persistent trails. Highly persistent trails are often seen in the form of isolated relatively short strips, as well as large areas of cirrus aviaticus clouds, but on rare occasions have been seen in totally unique grid and wheel formations.

www.chemtrailcentral.com...

Now, like I said before, I'm still undecided wether chemtrails are real or not, what I do know for sure, is that the amount of air-traffic and contrails nowadays, is manipulating the weather.

In 1998, NASA scientists found that by circling a jet off the Pacific coast of the United States they were able to create contrails that eventually coalesced into a cirrus cloud covering 1,400 mile² (3,600 km²). Satellite photographs have confirmed that on one occasion jet contrails produced by commercial aircraft over New Mexico formed a cloud covering 13,000 mile² (34,000 km²). It had been hypothesized that in regions such as the United States with heavy air traffic, contrails affected the weather, reducing solar heating during the day and radiation of heat during the night by increasing the albedo. The suspension of air travel for 3 days in the United States after September 11, 2001 provided an opportunity to test this hypothesis. Measurements did in fact show that without contrails the local diurnal temperature range (difference of day and night temperatures) was about 1 degree Celsius higher than immediately before. This has been hypothesised as a significant factor in global dimming, the process of reducing the light reaching the earth's surface, that has the effect of cooling for surface and thereby countering global warming.

It was also very obvious, a few weeks back, when air traffic was canceled in Europe, due to the Iceland volcano, super blue skies, not a single cloud present, I haven't experienced days like that since I was a little kid.

The next day it was back to the usual again. Persistant contrails, forming clouds and a haze in the sky.

Chemtrails or not, I don't like it.







[edit on 29-5-2010 by Point of No Return]

[edit on 29-5-2010 by Point of No Return]

reply to post by Point of No Return


Point of No Return.....

It was also very obvious, a few weeks back, when air traffic was canceled in Europe, due to the Iceland volcano, super blue skies, not a single cloud present, I haven't experienced days like that since I was a little kid.

The next day it was back to the usual again. Persistant contrails, forming clouds and a haze in the sky.

Chemtrails or not, I don't like it.

I don't think anybody stated that contrails don't effect weather.

Here is an OzWeatherman thread pertaining to that.

The Astounding Effect Of Contrails On Climate

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned

 

HERE is more of the snippet, in context (your portion is in BOLD):

Burning processes are the most common sources of particulate matter—fly ash (from power plants), carbon black (from gasoline and diesel engines), and soot (from slash burning, forest fires, fireplaces, and wood stoves).

Are you suggesting that jet engines don't burn anything??

Interrupting here, to emphasize the NEXT sentence in the paragraph....focus -----

Particles between 2.5 and 10 microns are usually associated with fugitive dust from wind-blown sand and dirt from roadways, fields, and construction sites.

Is that clear enough???

Usually, means, if it weren't for Chemtrails, there would be mostly natural dust. But things these days are not usual.

By the way, using "usually" in a scientific report is not very scientific, is it?

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

I don't think anybody stated that contrails don't effect weather.

I don't think I stated that anybody did.

I'm just pointing out what i'm sure about, and what I'm not sure about.

I've noticed some newer members in this thread.

For their convenience, I've once again posted links to several excellent OzWeatherman threads that approac this topic thoroughly & scientifically.

I think they complement the excellent content in this thread that is being provided by Chadwickus, Phage, Essan, OzWeatherman, etc...

Chemtrails? Need help
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Contrail Chemtrail Research Thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Chemtrail Hoax
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Are these proof of Chemtrails or Contrails?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Chemtrail believers, I challenge you to debunk contrail science
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Contrails: Understanding why they aren’t chemtrails
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Chemtrail Myth
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is not a chemtrail! Atmospheric Phenomenon explained
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Implausible, and Meteorologically Inaccurate
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Astounding Effect Of Contrails On Climate
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Don't need to have an account to read what's written here.

Why don't you post a few of the pro-chemtrail threads?

Why don't you post links to research, like this;

The results of this study suggest that the range of size of particulate emissions from some jet engines clusters below 1.5 mm and that the emissions contain heavy metals. Therefore, jet exhaust particulates (JEPs) have the potential to adversely affect both the environment and human health. Little is known about the particulate component of jet engine emissions.

www.areco.org...





[edit on 29-5-2010 by OurskiesRpoisoned]

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

Don't need to have an account to read what's written here.
Why don't you post a few of the pro-chemtrail threads?

OurskiesRpoisoned.....

Don't need to have an account to read what's written here.

Of course......

However, I thought that if the members were "newish", those members may not yet have found those threads.

Why don't you post a few of the pro-chemtrail threads?

My intention was to be helpful & informative, not to perpetuate ignorance.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

I think they complement the excellent content in this thread that is being provided by Chadwickus, Phage, Essan, OzWeatherman, etc...

That's a lot of asses to kiss.

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

I think they complement the excellent content in this thread that is being provided by Chadwickus, Phage, Essan, OzWeatherman, etc...

That's a lot of asses to kiss.

Point of No Return.....

You're a funny guy!

Why'd you have to put those images in my head before breakfast!!!