over kill chemtrails (pics)

reply to post by Point of No Return

So did the phenomenon of persistent contrails that eventually spread out and haze up the entire sky exist 10-15 years ago?

A lot of people including myself seem to not remember the skies like this, a lot of people notice how bad it is nowadays.

Yes. And people noticed them too.



From 1919:

The second German sighting occurred on May 9, 1919, when a pilot flying over Berlin at about 26,000 feet noticed the generation of a cloud stream that extended for about forty miles behind his plane. This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.

www.accessmylibrary.com...

From 1940:

A few months later I witnessed the Battle of Britain taking place over my head in the July, August and September 1940. Being in SE London we had a grandstand view of the titanic struggle going on day aftr day with the intricate patterns of the contrails the most evident witness to the dog fights taking place.

www.bbc.co.uk... Short contrails do not produce intricate patterns.

1944:

So an airplane at great heights leaves behind it, stretching for endless miles, a visible "wake" composed of ice particles so tiny that they do not fall as snow but remain suspended in the air.

Source

From 1947:

Photo taken by Jerry Cole, combat aerialphotographer in the 390th Bomb Group at Framlingham Air Base in England. He is looking for a print from the original negative he shot around January 1944 or before. It shows contrails of P-47's crossing each other in the background and a B-17 in the foreground.

scoutbird.tripod.com...


From 1970:

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent conditions exist from 25,000 to 40,000ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.

journals.ametsoc.org...

Henry Wadsworth Hinkle, hired man down on the farm with Uncle Clarence and Aunt Martha, looked skyward a few days ago and was awed by the multiplicity of "vapor trails," as he called them. That's the old name. Now they are called contrails-short for condensation trails-resulting from the condensation of heat flowing from high-flying jet engines.

Source

A 43-year-old novice sailor said today that he followed jet contrails over the Atlantic to help him navigate after his sextant was smashed six days out of Pymouth, England.

Source He didn't follow jets, he followed contrails. You can't follow a short contrail.

1972:

Then there is the matter of cloudiness. The familiar contrails often left by high-flying planes might persist for a long time under some conditions.

Source


From 1973:

Often, after several clear days, high flying jets begin leaving condensation trails in the sky. These "contrails" are the result of the condensation of water vapor that accompanies engine combustion at high altitudes.

Source

He occasionally looked out the window at the earth and noted geographical locations. "We're coming over Europe and I've never seen so many jet plane contrails in my life," he reported

Source

Shore was no naïf; he recognized the irony of many of his images. One of the cleverest is "U.S. 97, South of Klamath Falls, Oregon, July 21, 1973," which depicts a desolate spot of road where a billboard displays a snowcapped-mountain scene — against actual mountains in the distance. The billboard image seems to emerge from the land itself. Along with a cattle gate and a sky with blown-out contrails, the billboard is a tired and shabby advertisement for America itself.

www.pitch.com... Contrails have to be around for a while to be "blown-out".

And yes, there are more of them nowadays.




[edit on 7/24/2010 by Phage]

Well why are some at the same altitude short as is normal an fades as you might expect, an the others are thick an misty that lasts all day an blocks out the Sun?

reply to post by Phage

So did the phenomenon of persistent contrails that eventually spread out and haze up the entire sky exist 10-15 years ago?

I'm not asking if persistent contrails were seen before.

I'm talking about the eventual hazing of the sky, wich was much less, or non existant,10 years ago, compared to the factor of air traffic growth.

[edit on 24-7-2010 by Point of No Return]

reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE


Because the conditions in the upper atmosphere are not consistent.

There can be patches of dry air, right next to patches of moist air.

The NOAA is much better at explaining it than me.

This cloud formation is very similar to the process that occurs when you breath on a cold winter day and you can see your own breath in the form of a "cloud". You may have noticed that on some days this "cloud" you produce lasts longer than on other days where it quickly disappears. The length of time that a contrail lasts is directly proportional to the amount of humidity that is already in the atmosphere. A drier atmosphere leads to a more short-lived contrail, while an atmosphere that has more humidity will lead to longer-lived contrails. However, if the atmosphere is too dry, no contrails will form. Occasionally a jet plane, especially if ascending or descending, will pass through a much drier or more moist layer of atmosphere which may result in a broken pattern to the contrail, with it appearing in segments rather than in one continuous plume.

www.wrh.noaa.gov...

Hope this helps

[edit on 24-7-2010 by ZombieJesus]

reply to post by Phage


It is important to tack on to what Phage posted, because it ties in with my treatise about High-Bypass TurboFans, and their exaust flows.

The reciprocating engines of WWII are an analogy to what I am saying.

The big, huge propellors on the piston engines moved a large, swirling mass of air backwards, that encased and surrounded the hot exaust gases.

This is very much the dynamics of the modern TurboFan...the big N1 fan, the primary source of engine thrust, blows a huge amount of swirling, cooler air aft, and it surrounds, and interacts with, the hot exhaust gases.

Older "straight" turbojets didn't have this "cushion" of cooler air sourroundidng hte hot exhaust...so they would tend to dissipate sooner, and not "blossom" as large.

The "blossoming" (as I just refered to it) is the result of old Mother Nature at work BTW. She just takes advantage of the clouds that are formed artificially (contrails) and enhances them. It's all a natural process....once intiated "unnaturally" by our machines.

reply to post by ZombieJesus


I just so happen to have snapped a shot of an on/off contrail a few weeks ago:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fc98d5dce32f.png[/atsimg]

reply to post by Point of No Return

Well then you need to pay attention.

This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
[...]the :chemtrail: believers are the "flat-earth" believers!!!

[...]

Hehe! I have yet to see proof that water could simple stick on a beach ball-shaped planet without sliding off. And science claims it is supposed to be gravitational force at work. But we cannot see this force.

Yet we see these long streaks of clouds with our own eyes and some believe it's either water vapors or chemicals. Who can be the authority to say these cloud trails are harmful or not?

reply to post by Chadwickus


Nice picture Chad

I happened to have snapped off a pic the other day showing the same phenomenon as well.




I thought it was a good visual example of showing when the contrails got to the end of the cirrus cloud, it hit a dry patch, and the trails stopped for a bit. If you look closely, you can see where one of the trails picked back up as the plane started heading to the right (it's a lil fuzzy though).

Originally posted by Point of No Return

I'm not asking if persistent contrails were seen before.

I'm talking about the eventual hazing of the sky, wich was much less, or non existant,10 years ago, compared to the factor of air traffic growth.

It was. That's why the phenomena was being described and studied with regards its possible impact on climate. In 1970.

to answer the questions, i took these pics in late may, the temps were reaching high 90's so that would be no humidity. why would contrails last so long in a low humid area, and not only that but start to form into man made clouds. i dont care if they are contrails or chemtrails but my concern is why are these planes making artificial clouds. theres to much room to say what it is but there really is the possibility and thats something we cant deny.

here is a link to the airport by my location

flightaware.com...

reply to post by fallinstar

i took these pics in late may, the temps were reaching high 90's so that would be no humidity. why would contrails last so long in a low humid area, and not only that but start to form into man made clouds

Because the temperature and humidity are not going to be the same at 30,000-35,000 feet. The air is much colder up there, and may or may not have humidity regardless of the ground temperature.

Because the temperature and humidity are not going to be the same at 30,000-35,000 feet. The air is much colder up there, and may or may not have humidity regardless of the ground temperature.

From my view when taking these that seemed to be at very low altitude, i do not believe these planes were 30,000 ft in the air, they did not look to be on a cruise path. you could be right though

Originally posted by fallinstar
to answer the questions, i took these pics in late may, the temps were reaching high 90's so that would be no humidity.

Conditions at ground level have no bearing on conditions at 30,000ft. Ever climbed a high mountain?

With the exact date we would be able to dig out atmospheric soundings to see what conditions were like at the time. Ideally, we need temps below -35c and high relative humidity at the altitude at which the aircraft is flying.

reply to post by fallinstar

this might help yea to make your mind up!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by One Moment

Originally posted by John_Q_Llama
The two primary answers you'll likely receive will be that those are contrails or they are chemtrails.


Like I said, however, there is no way to know for sure what they are.

That's true but it's pretty simple to figure out what they're NOT. With all the air space around our lil planet, you mean to tell me these planes have a sudden need (within the last few years) to fly within feet of one another (on their given 'flight path)?


Normal airplanes do NOT act like this. Normal planes fly in their respected and assigned air-space allowing them safe flights, departures and landing maneuvers! There is no need to fly in tandem which the OPs (and so many others) photos suggest.


Why is this so hard to accept? Something is going on and 'what's' going on is speculative at best but this is NOT the sky we all grew up with.

And those who feel a need to tell me: 'well OM, there are so many more airplanes flying now' will be deemed unworthy to banter with.

S&F


[edit on 24-7-2010 by One Moment]

Boy, it's obvious you have no insight or experience with modern aviation in the US. Aircraft can appear to be close but at altitudes where contrails might form, above 18,000', all aircraft are under positive control and are separated from each other either vertically (1,000 feet now under RVSM or 3/5/10 miles laterally, depending on airspace type. So if you have 2 aircraft both going from LAX to PHX, they can fly parallel tracks at the same altitude 3 miles apart since the entire route is in a radar environment.
And the need is there since business travellers like to arrive in time for a morning meeting, the airlines will schedule multiple flights to the same destination, e.g., LGA to DCA to depart within a few minutes of each other. National sometimes looks like a NASCAR restart at 7 a.m.
And the aircraft with all the stuff hanging out in the video is a Grumman Gulfstram I turboprop, which would be a ludicrous choice for an aircraft to carry stuff to spray. It is slow (300 knots), won't carry much (13,200 pounds including fuel) and struggles to get to 30,000 feet. That paticular aircraft was outfitted for airframe icing research.

reply to post by fallinstar

From my view when taking these that seemed to be at very low altitude, i do not believe these planes were 30,000 ft in the air, they did not look to be on a cruise path. you could be right though

With the naked eye, it is pretty much impossible to determine the altitude of something 30,000-40,000 feet away from you.

maybe this has been posted before, but it looks convincing, so i'll share it here:

www.youtube.com...#!


explanations for plumes from the wings that can be switched on and off, seemingly at will? fuel dumps are carried out from the wing tips, iirc

reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE


If i would be a "conventual minded person" I would not be reading this or replying to this.

I know about all the patents. by the way....i think not even one patent is held by the department of defence.

I know that there are chemtrails, which they bring out tho control the weather. for example in china. they tried to "produce sunshine" during the olympics.

I know that there's some military projects. they try to hide planes in the radar.

but there's no big new world order plan to wipe us all out with barium and stuff. that's BS.
at least there is NO EVIDENCE for such plans and for chemtrails being used as weapons.absolutley no evidence.

I'm sorry for my bad english.