It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


over kill chemtrails (pics)

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 12:57 PM
reply to post by ZombieJesus

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

yes you are right, i am just saying they did seem low to my view (directly above my house), take it or deny it

[edit on 24-7-2010 by fallinstar]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 12:59 PM

Originally posted by fallinstar
there is an airport about 20 miles north of me which they could be a possibility, jus presenting some odd pics ive never seen it this bad

1) We can rule out the airport 20 miles away. Aircraft will not fly that high on approach to an airport, that would result in them having to drop thousands of feet per minute.

2) You say "I've never seen it this bad". What value system are you attaching to these contrails here? In what sense are they bad? What I am seeing is a flight path in use by multiple aircraft. The thinner contrails are the fresher ones, the thicker ones have had more time to disperse. I'm not sure why these are bad (unless you are worried about global dimming, in which case good call).

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 01:02 PM
reply to post by Long Lance

Long Lance, if you search you will find a very recent thread about that EXACT youtube video.


Adding: here it is:

It is NOT "spraying" are seeing normal contrails, and occasionally the airplane is flying through existing cirrus clouds...hence the "mist"-like effects that appear a few times, along the wings.

Honestly the disinformation regarding "chemtrails" was started by those who have an agenda to push this nonsense --- whether because they are truly that deluded, or they saw an opportunity to prey on the gullible for profit, I don't know which...probably a combination of both.

In the thread about THAT video, the guy who actually shot it, and is heard commenting on the sound track?? He came into the thread and told eveyone he was the did it as a joke! Because we pilots laugh at the "chemtrailers"...
... still, some of us actually try to dispel the myths, others enjoy riling them up, like poking a beehive or wasps nest!

(Personally, I prefer education over pranking...I'm not very good at coming up with practical jokes...too literal).

Listen very, very carefully to their banter...they are being sarcastic, and having a good laugh as well....

At ATS, we may chuckle sometimes, but usually that's rude, so a good many just offer what knowledge we hove, and hope at least some who drop by to read will get it, and learn something as a result.

[edit on 24 July 2010 by weedwhacker]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 01:08 PM
The key to this issue is held in the realm of geo-engineering, and the C02 fiasco that hangs over the planets ideological and political atmosphere. What's hanging over our real atmosphere is S02 from geoengineering chemtrails, and N0x from commercial and military contrails.

For all interested in researching the real issues, there's a huge compilation to be found here:

Here is an early patent for chemspraying, originally granted to Howard Hughes’ company, and later sold to Boeing.

Geo-engineering is a UN-backed initiative, which can be seen from their official site, and ties to the British Royal Society as one of the prime proponants of this movement. Interestingly enough, key members of this society are also named members of the Optimum Population Trust, who advocate a two-child limit to families, to reduce populations of all countries in the EU and the world.

To address the futility of relying on official agencies for climate data, it's an utter act of faith. We can't go back and re-measure the data of times past, and they know this over-well. To know this is to see a black root of what has swept up the world in the global-warming.

The tiny, close-knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the “global warming” fraud — for fraud is what we now know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures. One of the thousands of emails recently circulated by a whistleblower at the University of East Anglia, where one of the world’s four global-temperature datasets is compiled, reveals that data were altered so as to prevent a recent decline in temperature from showing in the record. In fact, there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for 15 years — and there has been rapid and significant cooling for nine years.

Worse, these arrogant fraudsters — for fraudsters are what we now know them to be — have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings. Now we know why: As a revealing 15,000-line document from the computer division at the Climate Research Unit shows, the programs and data are a hopeless, tangled mess. In effect, the global temperature trends have simply been made up. Unfortunately, the British researchers have been acting closely in league with their U.S. counterparts who compile the other terrestrial temperature dataset — the GISS/NCDC dataset. That dataset too contains numerous biases intended artificially to inflate the natural warming of the 20th century.

The missing link for some is simply understanding that there is a reason for sprays to be used in the atmosphere. "For what reason would they ...", and "What uneducated morons would believe that ..." go the disinfo lines, intended to break the link between the controversy and the false reality already conveyed as though it were a sacred science. Please see the link in my sig below regarding disinfo; it certainly has been liberally applied to this topic.

Anyone can see what the ‘geoengineering’ proposals were simply by reading the relevant article in Popular Science.

For those for whom that is difficult, the proposals included: 1) underground storage of carbon dioxide, 2) wind scrubbers to filter carbon dioxide from the air, 3) ‘fertilization’ of oceans with iron to encourage growth of plankton, 4) petrification of carbon dioxide, 5) deflection of sunlight from the earth through the use of a giant space mirror ‘spanning 600,000 square miles’.

One point worth mentioning at least in passing is that, apart from the question of how effective these measures would really be, all these highly oil-dependent ‘solutions’ to problems largely caused in the first place by burning fossil fuels, are being prepared for a world that is beginning to run out of oil. (!)

In the case of at least one geoengineering measure, by no means the most ‘outlandish’, namely: ‘Enhancing Clouds to Reflect Sunlight’, a mass of eyewitness evidence for all over the world suggests that, despite official denials, a programme serving some such purpose is not merely a proposal but a reality and has been under implementation on an immensely large scale for at least a decade.

How significant are official denials? Note that the Popular Science article itself admits that the US administration’s words about ‘proof that the planet is warming’ do not match its deeds. If untruthful official denial of global warming is possible, why should untruthful official denial of actually ongoing measures, supposedly to combat global warming, not similarly be possible?


I encourage more personal research into this subject. It's a no-brainer that there is much they're not telling us, and there have been thousands upon thousands of cases of government spraying documented in the past, dating back over sixty years ago.

It's nothing new.

Here's a chemtrail gem. NASA's new "green" jet fuel has nano-aluminum particulates, etc, which are supposed to be a step up from the former propellants.

And another to ponder, Operation Deep Shield.

etc... The problem with this topic is that there is too much to explain, not a lack of proof.

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 01:17 PM
reply to post by Northwarden

The problem with this topic is that there is too much to explain, not a lack of proof.

Aluminum particles in rocket fuel. Are you saying rockets are creating those "chemtrails"?

Researchers are developing a new type of rocket propellant composed of a frozen mixture of water and "nanoscale aluminum" powder that is considered more ecological than conventional propellants and could be manufactured on the moon and Mars.

"Deep Shield"? Evidence please. The problem with this topic is that there is no evidence of "chemtrails" and plenty of evidence that airplanes cause persistent contrails which can spread and cover the sky. Contrails which are composed of water.

[edit on 7/24/2010 by Phage]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 01:22 PM
reply to post by fallinstar

fallinstar, you earlier linked to your location, using 'flightaware' (nice one, BTW!
It's a good start...)

Since Williams Airport is near you, you must live in Tempe/Gilbert, right?

(I lived in Phoenix from 1990 to 1999. Bell Road/Tatum part of the time, and McCormick Ranch area).

Did you see my link to 'skyvector' so you could see the actual Jet Airways over the Phoenix area, to get ideas of how airplanes are routed?

I tried a screenshot, don't know how today, for some reason...(hotel computer)...

So....knowing the routings as I do, I looked up (randomly) flights from KIAH to KLAX (Houston, TX to Los Angeles, CA).

I selected one from yesterday, Continental flight #695

That should show the 'flightaware' screen where I got the flight plan from:



It occurs to me that, since flihgtaware stores the last few days' data, one could compile a list of flights that passed overhead your area, and then reference flight numbers, times, etc. Big job for somebody, but not me. My time is best spent in better ways...


That's what the FAA needs for its flight planning computers.
(It is also very similar to the same format we use when inputting into the onboard navigation computer and systems).

'JCT' is (all three-letter codes are) a VOR...called "Junction". 'JCT6' is a procedure out of the Houston airport.

Link to the Junction Six departure

On the 'SID' (standard instrument departure) it takes 'you' to JCT, where hte enroute portion of the FP begins...carry on along the Airways (the extra VORs aren't mentioned, unless you change routes)...

See the 'J86' and 'J4'? Well, look in your area, and you can see 'J4' too....the flight went along J86 to 'ELP' (El Paso) then direct to San Simone (SSO), then along J4 to TNP (Twenty Nine Palms) and the LAX arrival...SEAVU2. That is the 'STAR', and the enroute protion of the flight is technically ended. (Contrails only form at higher altitudes, above ~25,000 feet usually).

Link to the SEAVU TWO arrival

'SEAVU' is reference to an intersection (all five-letter codes are intersections...also today they may be referred to as 'waypoints', for the purposes of GPS). The '2' merely means it is the second major iteration of the Arrival Procedure that derives its name from being 'anchored' by the SEAVU intersection. Major changes result in the re-numbering scheme --- it tends to denote the currency of the procedure (along with the chart effective date as well...)

The way that routing would be read out verbally, such as when receiving the clearance over the radio (today the data is 'uplinked' directly, and is printed out for hard-copy reference, using the onboard printer):

"Continental 695, cleared to Los Angeles via the Junction six departure, Junction transition; Jet 86 El Paso, direct San Simone; Jet 4 Twenty Nine Palms, SEAVU two arrival..." Then there'd be additional stuff, initial altitudes, expected cruise altitude, departure frequency to use, and the transponder squawk code. Etc.


This is one example, and is very typical...multiply by the number of competing airlines, different companies...different city pairs, similar cities...different altitudes along the same routes, etc.

You can see how complicated it becomes.

There is NO ROOM for additional weight to carry, for this alleged "spraying" is nonsense to believe that! Besides, it is also fact that the airplanes simply have no provisions for such activity.

THIS is why the entire "chemtrail" garbage is a compete hoax! All calculated to spread fear and incite fury among those who aren't equipped to know better, because they don't have the level of knowledge and education that others have....this is true of any field of expertise, whether aerospace, medicine or physics.

[edit on 24 July 2010 by weedwhacker]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 01:54 PM
reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE

i dont care what you or any other conventual minded person has to say on this subject

What an open mind!

No wonder reality and logical thought and expression are so foreign to you. Are you afraid of these, as much as you are of cloud seeding, too?

i know the difference between contrails an chemtrails even though it seems you don't!

Then please enlighten us with your images and explanation of the differences.

Why don't YOU make "one day the rest will see the truth" a reality, and prove this right now for the ignorant masses? Please.

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by Phage

I'm giving solid evidence of a type of chemtrail, rather than implying this is the source of chemtrails. Rocket launches are only so common. Car and truck exhaust, factory pollution, and pesticides remain of greater concern than geo-engineering in my mind, as health issues. Still, scientists bio-engineer plants to resist "aluminum poisoning", and Al in our atmosphere has a recognized toxic level by which we measure.

As for Operation Deep Shield, good points, and I would have to check if a thread has been done. If not, it's overdue. That second link claims thousands of essays available on the topic. Sounds like more than a grain of truth to me.

[edit on 24-7-2010 by Northwarden]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by One Moment
well OM, there are so many more airplanes flying now, want to see?

Maybe you'll believe a picture; isn't that what you put your faith in for the chemtrail religion?

[edit on 24-7-2010 by jdub297]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 02:22 PM

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by Rohdan

Yea an who are the Debunkers? only other debunkers who all agree with each other, well that holds no water with me! an im not are been watched very closley we will have our day!

I am sure that you noticed that the air sampling tubes on the fuselage actually face FORWARD, not backwards. And the other device appears to be a cloud physics probe, probably a CCN counter (Cloud condensation nuclei).

But tell us what about that make make you decide it was one of your chemplanes

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 02:23 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Chemtrails, only a myth Weedwacker? Well, no, and we've had this conversation before. It's a wonder you're still breathing after living there for years ... I'm not saying it's all from chemtrails, but the pollution there just astounds me.

2009 Air Particulates Report for Pheonix, AZ

From the Arizona Skywatch

Please check out this video trailer to get a look at the other side of the Global Warming debate. Make no mistake, Global Warming / Climate Change is the rationale behind Global Geo-Engineering. It is the new world jihad, even now being touted, to religious leaders, as a "moral imperative" by Al Gore's minions. CO2 is the new Osama Bin Laden.

We have pleaded with some of you to oppose this massaged and manipulated science called global warming with the axis of evil = CO2. Now it has taken on a life of its own. You know the saying, “who needs enemies with friends like this?” ~ Kudos to the mis-information specialists and their highly decorated and degreed minions.

Do we sound cranky, it is because we are. We realize the full extent of where all the grandstanding, cyber-chatter, digging in of the heels, back stabbing, in house liars, and plain-out inability to work in concert has taken us.

We failed to protect our future with our own stupidity and arrogance which has brought us full circle to where we will pay dearly and monetarily for our own demise.

The big bad enemy CO2 is holding the reigns on this runaway basket to hell. To all the self-satisfied collaborators: thank you so much for sharing your fast held data on global warming / climate change, telling us that you are an expert, the years of study you claimed to have but never shared, obviously because it did not exist. No apology necessary, but thanks.

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 02:27 PM
reply to post by Phage

So how do you explain why so many people are seeing the sky being hazed up, when they weren't seeing this en masse 15 years ago.

I don't think air traffic grew as much as the phenomenon has grown, in that time, relatively.

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 03:30 PM
reply to post by ZombieJesus

my training is a keen eye for the likes of you who down the centuries have taken the official view of the world an brought it to the Masses as a definite truth!
remember this most conspiracies theories of the past are now knowing as truth!
but at the time were ridiculed an laughed at but im here to tell yea different your days are numbered!

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 03:58 PM
reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE

How does the saying go? If you're not being ridiculed or laughed at, your not onto anything important? Or something like that.

Seems to me, there are a lot of posts taking the piss..probably a good idea to look further into this.

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 04:16 PM
reply to post by spikey

I should say so, there is a depopulation agenda going on at the moment and also weather motivaction without the consent of the people among other things that suit tptb, the debunkers on here of course will deny any of this as the ravings of mad men! but im far from been mad an since the 60s we have been aware of this but what can i say its up to you guys now to fight for the truth!

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 04:43 PM

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
an since the 60s we have been aware of this but what can i say its up to you guys now to fight for the truth!

So you've known about this since 50 years and still you can't make a coherent or convincing case for the existence of this plot? After 50 years I would have expected some evidence :-)

Also something I don't get. You chemtrailers should get your story straight - here you're talking about this going on since the 60's while one of the few others in this thread who believes in the chemtrail myth insists that this chemtrail plot is so obvious exactly because it only started a decade ago or so which makes it so obvious since "we all remember how blue the skies were back then"....

Where's the evidence? let me tell you one thing. If I would truly believe that some nefarious cabal was spraying the sky and was going to kill billions of people I wouldn't spend 50 years going around making vage accusation against some "elite" - I'd be going out and be seeking every possible shred of evidence of the plot.... Either you're lazy or your chasing chimeras... or both ... or there is a nefarious plot. What's more probable to you from a third person perspective?

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 04:50 PM

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by Phage

So how do you explain why so many people are seeing the sky being hazed up, when they weren't seeing this en masse 15 years ago.

Simple. They aren't very observant.

Other people have been seeing the sky hazed up for decades and have been photographing it, reporting it and studying it.

How do you explain this?

[edit on 24-7-2010 by Essan]

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 05:08 PM
I've finally joined ATS after seeing your post.

The same activity seems to be going on in many places. This is all being orchestrated. There is no doubt about it.

Since last year, I have always watched the sky for trails. It seemed to be a completely steady schedule until sometime around the late spring this year. For a few weeks or months, we had amazingly clear skies, no trails and no abnormal clouds.

Just in the last few weeks, they have been popping up again. Just in time for some nasty weather. Without a doubt, these clouds are not natural. They form something more than what is left behind.

Last night, I even heard a military jet fly by very low. Some people I know saw it. The sky was already covered in a haze, so I could not see if it contributed anything to it.

It's ridiculous how many people brush off the FACT that chem-trails exist. People will believe in a God they have never seen, but they will ignore a health hazard right in front of their eyes.

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 05:14 PM
reply to post by fallinstar



A "chemtrail" is a paranoid delusion.


Irrational people keep ignoring scientific evidence & logical thinking, thereby unnecessarily scaring people who are susceptible to such ideas.

There is no such thing as a "chemtrail".

Please refer to the following threads:

Chemtrails? Need help?

Contrail Chemtrail Research Thread

The Chemtrail Hoax

Are these proof of Chemtrails or Contrails?

Chemtrail believers - I challenge you to debunk contrail science

Contrails: Understanding why they aren’t chemtrails

The Chemtrail Myth

This is not a chemtrail! Atmospheric Phenomenon explained

Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Implausible & Meteorologically Inaccurate

The Astounding Effect Of Contrails On Climate

How To Forecast Using Clouds Part 1

If you have any further questions, you may contact me.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 05:50 PM

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



A "chemtrail" is a paranoid delusion.


Irrational people keep ignoring scientific evidence & logical thinking, thereby unnecessarily scaring people who are susceptible to such ideas.

There is no such thing as a "chemtrail".

lol In this day and age one should be paranoid, soon the internet will be taken down so why not observe every shred of evidence via internet. you call ME irrational, yes i have read the threads regarding chemtrails but i think its sad people would rather believe thier government is here to help them with all the injustices going on today, they have the power and they do use it.... now go back to work!

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in