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.

 

Have These Chemtrail Formations Been Appearing In Your City Lately?

page: 21
14
<< 18  19  20    22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by apex
 



Well man, I really just interjected to give my opinion on that website.
No, I don't really want to refute anything because it will just be a back and forth battle.
Chemtrails is one of those topics where you either get it or you don't. You are either naive or you are not.
They do Chemtrails where I live pretty blatantly so it is easy to tell when they do them. It's possible they don't do them where you live like they do where I live. It's one of those things I guess that require you to see in order to believe.




posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by apex
 


It's pretty easy to make up a name and an email address and put it on your own website.

I DON"T care what the about info on his actual website says. The entire website is full of half truths, so why would another page on the same site be any different???

FACT is that when you attempt to find the owner of the domain by using the IP address or domain name, you can't. Because it goes through a private proxy somewhere in Arizona.


You have been asked by multiple people, to list what in the Contrail Science website that is scientiically incorrect. As far as I know you have yet to even point out one thing and just mention disinfo over and over.

The science looks pretty sound on there to me, so by all means, tell us what is not correct on there. Sure looks a lot more sound than chemtrailer websites and silly youtube videos that you all fall for.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


I say that because that's all it is.

I don't see any "science" on that website using the scientific method and providing controlled experiments and so on. All I see is a bunch of "links" and videos and anecdotal crap to help persuade.
So no, I do not need to provide an answer to your question because the site does it for me.
And I'm not replying again to you firepilot....
edit on 24-1-2011 by dplum517 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Lack of substance, duly noted.


Which is what chemtrails is all about - lots of accusations, but not substance behind them. Its what all too many chemtrailers do. If they could actually point out something that was incorrect, they would. Its not so much that any statements on there are incorrect, its because it does not support "Chemtrails", so it must be disinfo.

Strangely enough, when chemtrail websites and chemtrailers make massive factual errors, these do not seem to fall under this silly term of "disinfo" in their world, making disinfo a meaningless term, and an accusation that falls flat, time and time again
edit on 24-1-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by dplum517
 


Jeeeeezzzzzeeee....

The science is everywhere if you just look!!! "Chem"-trailers?? They are all twisting around, back-biting and arguing with what's "actually" happening....and not ONE of them presents actual, solid evidence of any sort. It has been shown each time to be incorrect (wrong/misidentified photos, poorly researched "lab" tests of "samples" unscientifcally obtained, etc...).

Back to real science....NASA, NOAA....hell, all of the people from the member nations of the WMO!!!

Not to mention every science teacher in any school or University in the developed world!

And, the ones who believe in "chem"-trails? People like THIS woman (such a tragic example of utter ignorance, it's hard to watch):



Geeze....she can't even pronounce the words!!!! And, has NO IDEA that the scientific nomenclature of cloud "naming" dates to over a CENTURY ago (or longer). They are based on Latin, as are every other valid scientific naming convention.

Hilarious, if it weren't so tragic, as well......"Cirro-Come-Yew-Luss" ?? Oh, the poor dear is dumb as a post.....sorry. (Her American accent makes the rest of us shudder in shame....)

THAT is the summation of the "chem"-trail lore, and basic HOAX......



edit on 24 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by dplum517
 


Do we get all our information from Contrail Science? Contrail Science wasn't around when I joined the RAF during the 1980s. The problem lies with the fact that most chemtrailers can't even work out why an aircraft engine produces a contrail? That is why the likes of You Tube is full of closed minded individuals producing video after video of 'smoking gun' evidence. They can't even work out when they are part of a hoax as produced by USAF KC-10 aircrew?

They produce constant drivel and block anyone who provides proof of what they are filming. Take a look at the comments such as.

'Does anybody have guesses as to what that is on the bottom of that airplane? A tank of some kind that holds the chemtrail chemicals?'



One of the most distinctive airline liveries in the world and they can't even identify it? It really is mind numbing. They would rather promote it that the aircraft is carrying a large chemical tank rather than it simply being part of the Monarch Airlines colour scheme.

www.airliners.net...

TJ



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Lubbock Tx Jan 22nd about 5:40 pm headed due west
picture is through the windsheild with iphone 4 (any bugs or reflections are just that not a ufo)





posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
I count atleast 7headed that way I searched and the next biggest airport is not really in that path but alb. N.M. which is about an hour by plane.
edit on 24-1-2011 by rushunt because: I cant count!



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by rushunt
I count atleast 7headed that way I searched and the next biggest airport is not really in that path but alb. N.M. which is about an hour by plane.
edit on 24-1-2011 by rushunt because: I cant count!

Isn't Lubbock right in line (air traffic-wise) between Dallas and the major cities in the SW U.S., not to mention Los Angeles?

I would think those trails could easily be from normal air traffic heading from Dallas (both DFW and Love Field) and Houston to places like Albuquerque, Phoenix, and Los Angeles. I bet half of those trails in your photo are from American Airlines and Southwest Airlines jets, both of whom have major hubs in Dallas.

I live about 125 miles WNW of New York City, smack in the middle of the air traffic route coming from New York. I can look up and see a jet airliner flying overhead at least every 5 minutes (more than that during busy times). Sometimes the weather conditions are conducive to the production of regular persistent contrails like in your picture, and sometimes the conditions aren't conducive to trails.
edit on 1/25/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Let me get this straight. You are saying that multiple planes flying close to each other and below 30,000 feet are all commercial planes just passing by on there way to another destination???? PLEASE invest in a pair of astronomy binoculars and watch the planes leaving the trails then tell me which airline it is. You could not be more wrong. I'm not saying you don't see regular airliners passing by every now and then but to say the ones that you can see in the air at the same time relatively close to each other flying at cloud level and leaving horizon to horizon trails are all commercial?!?! ...I have to laugh



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

I'm not saying you don't see regular airliners passing by every now and then but to say the ones that you can see in the air at the same time relatively close to each other...

There are dozens of planes coming from the New York Airports every hour. If even 1/4 of those planes head west, there could easily be two in the air over my house at a given time, sometimes in side-by-side air lanes. Lateral air traffic separation is about 3 to 5 miles for planes flying at the same altitude, but less for planes flying at different altitudes. Looking up at two planes in the sky flying at 6 miles high, those planes could appear to be separated by 2 miles, and it may seem they are closer to each other than that because of the huge amount of sky that can be seen at one time.

Those two planes on the right side of rushunt's picture are probably at least 3 miles apart, which is perfectly normal -- especially if both of those planes just took off from DFW and are headed the same general direction.



...flying at cloud level...

I'm not sure exactly how high you mean by "cloud level", but I don't know why two planes flying at close to the same altitude seems odd to you. I believe they only need to be separated by 2,000 feet (which is a virtually unnoticeable difference as seen the ground).


...and leaving horizon to horizon trails are all commercial?!?!

Normal contrails can be horizon to horizon under certain (and not uncommon) conditions. This has been established already.


edit on 1/25/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: typo



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Let me get this straight. You are saying that multiple planes flying close to each other and below 30,000 feet are all commercial planes just passing by on there way to another destination???? PLEASE invest in a pair of astronomy binoculars and watch the planes leaving the trails then tell me which airline it is. You could not be more wrong. I'm not saying you don't see regular airliners passing by every now and then but to say the ones that you can see in the air at the same time relatively close to each other flying at cloud level and leaving horizon to horizon trails are all commercial?!?! ...I have to laugh


Laugh all you want at him, at least he knows what he is talking about. Compared to some people who know little...

And they would be ABOVE 30,000 ft most likely, and yes they can be over the exactly same spot, as long as they are seperated by at least 1,000 ft. Why do chemtrailers think that any aircraft up high must all be at the same altitude and therefore in some kind of sinister formation..



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


Once again you don't know about context. I never said any and every plane.
Sorry to burst your bubble but yes, I see planes lower than 30,000 feet and closer than 1000 feet together. I mean there is a pic of some right above these posts....... Can you not see the trails in the pic and there closeness and at one point they stop..... Where it appears they stop is actually the airplanes.

firepilot .... you grasp at the most bullsh** straws. Why is it that you respond to me even though I wasn't responding to you? Nor do I even want to converse with you...not because your threaten any sort of data but rather you are simply to dense to allow other thoughts into your brain.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by firepilot
 


Once again you don't know about context. I never said any and every plane.
Sorry to burst your bubble but yes, I see planes lower than 30,000 feet and closer than 1000 feet together. I mean there is a pic of some right above these posts....... Can you not see the trails in the pic and there closeness and at one point they stop..... Where it appears they stop is actually the airplanes.


I specifically mentioned those two planes in my post...and they are NOT 1000 feet apart. Those planes are probably separated by a couple of miles.

Plus, if they are flying at different altitudes (say one at 30,000 and one at 35,000), then their air lanes would be allowed to be much closer to each other (I'm not sure, but I think one could be almost directly above the other??)


edit on 1/25/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by dplum517
 


Your post is an example of the ignorance that is out there. You have obviously not studied Air Traffic Control routes nor invested in any software for monitoring such activity. It is a major hobby out there. Are you not aware of how busy the skies are? Think how many movements take place in the US alone on any given day. The aircraft fly routes and lanes and are legally separated by height. Have you never travelled on a scheduled airliner during a busy part of the day? Next time you travel take a look out of the window and watch carefully. You will see other aircraft above and below and also at times flying parallel.

Yes there are also military movements and these also produce contrails, but the vast majority that you will see, depending on where you live, are routine airliner traffic. Explain to me your fascination with military aircraft producing contrails? They are powered by jet engines and will produce contrails as per a civilian airliner.

Yes airline routes such as the images from Texas are and can be that busy. This is nothing out of the ordinary.

Take a look at the following website.

www.wrh.noaa.gov...

Now according to you it must be telling lies? Have you ever travelled on an airliner and watched the engines from a window seat? What do you think produces the contrail?

In your opinion is this Wiki entry telling lies?

en.wikipedia.org...

TJ



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Well that is just a picture and of course we can pick it apart.
But that doesn't explain what a ton of people see in real life. Not only have I seen planes flying closer than 1000 feet I have seen up to 3 within 100s of feet of each other on a Chemtrail day. I am not blind or dumb... I know about perception and line of sight.... My grandma would have known they were right next to each other leaving trails.
Im not misinterpreting their height, I can tell they are at the same altitude very easily especially when they are close together flying in parallel.


edit on 25-1-2011 by dplum517 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by firepilot
 


Once again you don't know about context. I never said any and every plane.
Sorry to burst your bubble but yes, I see planes lower than 30,000 feet and closer than 1000 feet together. I mean there is a pic of some right above these posts....... Can you not see the trails in the pic and there closeness and at one point they stop..... Where it appears they stop is actually the airplanes.

firepilot .... you grasp at the most bullsh** straws. Why is it that you respond to me even though I wasn't responding to you? Nor do I even want to converse with you...not because your threaten any sort of data but rather you are simply to dense to allow other thoughts into your brain.


Because..I can.

And besides, isnt the motto of this website "Deny Ignorance", and thats what I do. No matter how much it pains you chemtrailers, and no matter how much some of you would rather live in your comfortable delusions, rather than have to deal with the hard truth.

Besides, you have no proof, or any idea what an airplanes altitude is. Somehow you have superhuman abilities and can tell that an aircraft up high is under 30,000 ft. Sorry, but if it is a jet up there in cruise, you have no idea on its specific altitude, unless you have listen in with a scanner, or watch flight tracking websites, neither of which you do.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


Of course I have been on airliners. Actually, I have been on them all my life and of course I see other jets below and above and just so happens none of them leave a fuc*%#* trail.
And YES a stupid little wiki can lie...in fact the internet is full of lies. I am not getting my anecdotal evidence from the internet. I get it from REAL LIFE.

And you my friend are the one displaying the most ignorance. You only spout off what you want and ignore all other facts and evidence.

EXPLAIN to all of us why these jets would be flying within 100s of feet and lower than 30,000 feet leaving horizon to horizon trails?



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by tommyjo
 


Of course I have been on airliners. Actually, I have been on them all my life and of course I see other jets below and above and just so happens none of them leave a fuc*%#* trail.
And YES a stupid little wiki can lie...in fact the internet is full of lies. I am not getting my anecdotal evidence from the internet. I get it from REAL LIFE.

And you my friend are the one displaying the most ignorance. You only spout off what you want and ignore all other facts and evidence.

EXPLAIN to all of us why these jets would be flying within 100s of feet and lower than 30,000 feet leaving horizon to horizon trails?



Can you please provide a photograph or video of two seemingly normal planes (i.e., not a military formation) actively flying 100s of feet from each other?



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by dplum517
 


Of course aircraft fly in formation and also produce contrails. How do you think military aircraft practice close formation flying and air-to-air refuelling? Formation flying is part and parcel of a military aviators life. If they fly at height and the conditions are right then their engines will produce contrails. What is it so hard to understand?

Air refuelling tankers and the others such as AWACS fly racetrack patterns at height. They fly racetrack patterns and loops in order to remain in that general area in order to provide tanking or tanking practice for receivers. If the conditions are correct then contrails will form. Again, why is so hard to understand?

Watch the following video. Large military transport aircraft intercepted by fighters as practice. Contrails forming and nothing out of the ordinary.



TJ

edit on 25-1-2011 by tommyjo because: spelling




top topics



 
14
<< 18  19  20    22 >>

log in

join