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.

 

CLOSE-UP VIDEO: Pilot filming plane spraying into the air

page: 21
129
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

USAFFEKC1O has posted three videos. All three are of "chemtrails". The first was posted a month ago.

The video does not show a fuel dump. This video shows a fuel dump. See how the fuel leaves the nozzle as a stream. The "chemtrail' video does not resemble this in the least.


The video shows aerodynamically induced contrails.



[edit on 7/19/2010 by Phage]

[edit on 7/19/2010 by Phage]




posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
OK, I just looked through his videos.

For 100% sure now, he's a KC-10 pilot.

www.youtube.com...

Here's a video of him trailing another KC-10 filming its contrails.

This is a contrail, not a fuel dump, and not a chemtrail.



The OP video is a fuel dump.



In the video you can hear a guy commenting on writing EPRs

They are airforce officers posting joke videos.


[edit on 19-7-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   
A rare day, when the air is clear.
Chemtrails will soon appear.
Crisscrossing the clear blue sky.
MMN does not know why.

A pilot will come and say b.s.
Another comes and says, oh yes.
Does it matter what a "pilot" says.
Anonymously, here on ATS.

It must be nice to know what's real.
What cannot be and what is concealed.
To come and tell us here's the deal.
You're guilty of stupid with no appeal.

I think I will trust my own two eyes.
With my own brain, I will analyze.
But, I hope some day the dicks realize.
They had the chance to apologize.

Chemtrails are real. Get over it.



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
That first video IS NOT a fuel dump, because fuel dumping comes out of specific nozzles towards the wing tip. Its goign through areas of more cirrus and having momentary aerodynamic contrailing. This is not rocket science...

This is the same kind of thing in this picture from below.





posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
[edit on 19-7-2010 by smurfy]



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


Dude, its a fuel dump.

I am 100% sure they are airfarce KC-10 pilots filming fuel dumps and contrails then posting them as chemtrail joke videos.

The guy is in the video commenting in writing EPR Bullets, to which entire websites are dedicated.

eprbullets.com...


This video is a joke video posted by a bunch of airfarce officers screwing around.



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


There are no ice crystal with air temperature of 35ºC.



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by smurfy
 

No. Why don't people read the things they post? These are notes for a conference, things to be discussed at the conference. It certainly does not contain anything that says anything is or has been done.


Unlike the control of greenhouse gas emissions, which must be undertaken by all major emitting nations to be effective and is likely to be costly, geoengineering could be undertaken quickly and unilaterally by a single party, at relatively low cost. Unilateral geoengineering, however, is highly likely to impose costs on other countries and run risks with the entire planet’s climate system.

We will probe whether it is possible to limit the use of geoengineering to circumstances of collective action by the international community in the face of true global emergencies and what might happen when there are disputes over when the emergency “trigger” should be pulled.

www.cfr.org...

The document does not say anything is being done. It does not say anything should be done. It says that if it ever becomes necessary to attempt such action it should not be done unilaterally but with international agreement. It says it's a scary idea.



and Weed,
Who said I didn't read it! Do you still not understand? the "proposals" are but a post event. They are also not proposals but options, for something that will be done by someone, sometime. (they say thay, did you miss that bit) To the CFR it was irrelevant that trials had already occured, all they are worrying about is who will be "Big Momma" So don't go with the big put down Phage or Weed, you know I try to put thought into anything I post, I don't usually shout, or put others down to make a point.



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by crustas
 


crustas, it isn't a problem with my eyes. It is a perception problem on your end, apparently.

Looky, looky:



That there, my friend, is something called a "prism". Gee, I went to the Museum of Science and Industry on a field trip in fourth grade, if I remember the year correctly, and learned a bunch about the basic principles.

WATER droplets, and the form of hard water we call "ice" --- especially when it is existing in smallish crystals suspended in the air (like their cousins, the liquid droplets), will act as millions/ billions of tiny prisms, all doing the same thing to good old Mother (or is it Papa?) Sun's light...breaking it down into constituent colors of the visible (to us) EM spectrum. (We have named that "light", in English).

Ain't that neeeaaato???




[edit on 19 July 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by crustas
reply to post by firepilot
 


There are no ice crystal with air temperature of 35ºC.


Can you tell us where it is aloft, that has an air temp of 35c?



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Thanks guys, should I wait for pro-chems for the reveal?

But can we chill down on the name calling/bashing from both sides?

I believe a little critical thinking on both sides and one should be able to see where people are coming from…

In point, with history of chem sprays on unsuspecting subjects I can see where people can get the idea from.

Cloud seeding also could make one lean toward the nasty side of things.

If you go through this thread you will find "experts" contradict "experts" so one could also see where they don’t believe the anti-chem’ers. (not in all details but in some, however meaningless)

Simple research will prove wing tip vortices and contrails.
Being a Pilot I’ve seen them and for certain can tell you that the aircraft involved wasn’t discharging anything other than water vapor, but that is not to say that there isn’t chemical spraying going on.

Simply put, wouldn’t cloud seeding be chemical spraying?
If you believe Agent Orange, Agent White and Agent Purple were used on unknowing civilians in different countries then “chemtrails” isn’t a far stretch.

Would a government or certain government people do such a thing?
Yes of course, they have in the past, and we all know history repeats itself.

I grew up in western N.Y. during the time of the “Love Canal” incidents. If you want to see what power and money can do to human beings that is a story to set you off.
Local, State Gov officials and the EPA itself perpetrated the defrauding.
Years and years they were told they were safe…

I’m not Anti-Gov so to speak heh, I’ve served. But history has shown me that men and women great in power and money will do anything and everything to keep themselves in that way.
So I am skeptical of them…



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   
None of those chem debunkers ever explain 2 things:

-the drop in air temperature after 45 minutes of 2 two 3 degrees Celsius

-and the formation of wind with velocity of 20 km/h or up.

Maybe someone here would like to explain, or maybe not!



[edit on 19-7-2010 by crustas]



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by firepilot
 


Dude, its a fuel dump.

I am 100% sure they are airfarce KC-10 pilots filming fuel dumps and contrails then posting them as chemtrail joke videos.

The guy is in the video commenting in writing EPR Bullets, to which entire websites are dedicated.

eprbullets.com...


This video is a joke video posted by a bunch of airfarce officers screwing around.



Can you tell us how a fuel dump, comes all along the entire span of the wing, including over the upper surface of the wing, and comes and goes as they fly into more cirrus?

Its silly to think the entire back edge of the wing is a fuel dump nozzle. They have specific nozzles for dumping fuel, and no its not the flap hinges.

Just because they are making fun of chemtrail believers, well every pilot I know makes fun of chemmies. I have even wanted to make my own video too...



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 

So...the trials have been done. You know this...how?

CFR is worried about geoengineering being done at all.

All of these "geoengineering" strategies involve great uncertainty and carry significant risks. They may not work as expected, imposing large unintended consequences on the climate system. While offsetting warming, most strategies are likely to leave other impacts unchecked, such as acidification of the ocean, the destruction of coral reefs, and changes in composition of terrestrial ecosystems.

www.cfr.org...
It is not known if any of them will work and they carry other risks. They are worried that a single country might start doing something on their own rather than as a cooperative effort. That was the point of the conference, how to prevent that from happening.



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by firepilot

Originally posted by Genesis322
Wingtip vortices, contrails and chemtrails ???

1)i667.photobucket.com...

2) i667.photobucket.com...

3)
i667.photobucket.com...

4)
i667.photobucket.com...


1. Mosquito spraying C-130.

2. C-123s, operation Ranch Hand in Vietnam

3. B-24s, from WW2.

4. C-123, same as number 2.

I thought chemtrails was something from the late 90s, that involved large jet aircraft, not something involving Vietnam and World War 2. Apparently it is now.

So, do we now include Vietnam and World War 2 for chemtrails?


A+ 100% correct! good job on the Herc !

So we can see that the Herc is hard to discern even for the "trained eye"



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by smurfy
 


No. Why don't people read the things they post?


Phage.....

Maybe DICKDAVECLARKE can read it to him!

However, considering DICKDAVECLARK'S apparent orifically challenged state, smurfy had better stand back!


Cheers
Maybe...maybe not

Read the article...maybe or maybe you won't. Chemtrails have existed, and exactly as proposed by Edward Teller in 1997, the only difference is that they then were, just proposals based on the supposition that there was global warming on the evidence then.

www.chemtrails911.com...



posted on Jul, 19 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by smurfy
 

So...the trials have been done. You know this...how?

CFR is worried about geoengineering being done at all.

All of these "geoengineering" strategies involve great uncertainty and carry significant risks. They may not work as expected, imposing large unintended consequences on the climate system. While offsetting warming, most strategies are likely to leave other impacts unchecked, such as acidification of the ocean, the destruction of coral reefs, and changes in composition of terrestrial ecosystems.

www.cfr.org...
It is not known if any of them will work and they carry other risks. They are worried that a single country might start doing something on their own rather than as a cooperative effort. That was the point of the conference, how to prevent that from happening.


Any unknown is a possible risk, but your other reply to me was that they were only proposals, on methods to be used, which was rather singular, given what you have added above, also from the PDF and, of which I have already read. There is no might attached, the ballpark is open to everyone as the dollar signs go up, and as yet there is no fallout in doing it, like I said to Weed, it's not against the law. And since the last Global Warming conference collapsed, anybody and their granny could be "up there" right now doing their thing and ready to claim a bounty, so it's nowt' to do with countries even.







 
129
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join