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.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by __rich__
I can't find the quote snippet in the CFR article you sourced.
The Wiki link seems incomplete.
About "sulphur" suspended in the atmosphere...what are your thoughts regarding the HUGE amounts of sulphur, and other particulates, that were recently spewed by the volcano in Iceland?
Certainly that event produced a heckuva lot more material than humans would be able to loft, using airplanes alone?
Summary: Global warming is accelerating, and although engineering the climate strikes most people as a bad idea, it is time to take it seriously.
Summary: As climate change accelerates, policymakers may have to consider "geoengineering" as an emergency strategy to cool the planet. Engineering the climate strikes most as a bad idea, but it is time to start taking it seriously.
Despite years of speculation and vague talk, peer-reviewed research on geoengineering is remarkably scarce. Nearly the entire community of geoengineering scientists could fit comfortably in a single university seminar room, and the entire scientific literature on the subject could be read during the course of a transatlantic flight. Geoengineering continues to be considered a fringe topic.
The highly uncertain but possibly disastrous side effects of geoengineering interventions are difficult to compare to the dangers of unchecked global climate change. Chances are that if countries begin deploying geoengineering systems, it will be because calamitous climate change is near at hand. Yet the assignment of blame after a geoengineering disaster would be very different from the current debates over who is responsible for climate change, which is the result of centuries of accumulated emissions from activities across the world. By contrast, the side effects of geoengineering projects could be readily pinned on the geoengineers themselves. That is one reason why nations must begin building useful international norms to govern geoengineering in order to assess its dangers and decide when to act in the event of an impending climatic disaster.
Originally posted by akrasia
Well, the I am not sure what the upper temperature was that day, but I know it was taken in summer, around August. The outside temp was well above 100 degrees. Not sure why contrail would hang up there for so long if it wasn't cold enough up there.
In Las Vegas...we do not have flight paths with the airport that fly directly over the middle of the city. Departing flights generally make a left or right turn from leaving the runway and actually avoid most of the inner city...but they actually do fly over parts of Summerlin and North Las Vegas. There should be no reason why aircraft flew directly over the center of the city like this...and so many times to leave the criss cross pattern.
It could be a military exercise...but again...over the center of the city? I dunno....
Check out the maps of Las Vegas...specifically where the base and airport is located. Check out McCarran's flight patterns - they suggest there should be no reason for this much activity above the center of the city.
Originally posted by nunya13
I think the problem is that the argument for chemtrails is nothing but disinformation because of the "they're poisoning us" claims. This is a straw man argument that is easy to knock down for obvious reasons.
MY
There should be no reason why aircraft flew directly over the center of the city like this
I do know that it bothers me when I see a clear blue sky go from beautiful and crystal clear to having a complete whitish-grey blanket of "persistent contrails" covering it up. I believe what they are doing is seeding clouds. That is why some planes make the "persistent contrails" and others don't on the same day, at the same time, at the (seemingly) same altitude.
Originally posted by firepilot
I do know that it bothers me when I see a clear blue sky go from beautiful and crystal clear to having a complete whitish-grey blanket of "persistent contrails" covering it up. I believe what they are doing is seeding clouds. That is why some planes make the "persistent contrails" and others don't on the same day, at the same time, at the (seemingly) same altitude.
Cloud seeding is about precipitation enhancement, not cirrus. We had a long thread just a few days ago, regarding cloud seeding. A few people actually learned from it, but others would just stick their fingers in the ear and go "la la la I cant hear you"
You are using a cause and effect relationship, when often its not that. Cirrus occurs naturally, and when conditions for natural cirrus are present, the same thing is going to help contrails become more persistent too.
Airbus welcomes the latest steps towards the approval by ASTM International, one of the largest voluntary standards developing organizations in the world, for the use of a 50 per cent synthetic jet fuel in commercial aviation. Synthetic liquid jet fuels can be made from biomass, natural gas or coal. All of these are known as xTL fuels.
“This breakthrough paves the way for a 100 per cent xTL blend made entirely from bio feedstock, such as woodchip waste”, said Christian Dumas, Airbus Vice President Sustainable Development and Eco-Efficiency. “This new specification is a major step towards reducing aviation’s environmental footprint and represents a significant achievement along the Airbus alternative fuels roadmap,” he added.
The Airbus Alternative Fuels roadmap estimates that some 30 per cent jet fuel used in 2030...
Testing of the blend of synthetic and conventional JP8 in the CFM56 follows certification of the fuel in the Boeing C-17 airlifter and its Pratt & Whitney PW2000 engines (the same as on Boeing 757s) in December and in the P&W TF33-powered Boeing B-52 bomber in August 2007.
The US Air Force has started ground testing of the CFM56 engine with synthetic jet fuel made with the Fischer Tropsch process, further establishing the fuel’s future role in military and civil aviation.
The CFM56 is one of the most widely used engines in the world, powering the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737 families as well as the Airbus A340.
The Air Force hopes to meet half of its energy needs by 2016 with fuels made using the Fischer Tropsch process, which converts coal, natural gas and other carbon-based feedstocks into petroleum substitutes.