Is ATS Supporting Ignorance Concerning Chemtrails? I think so.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by unityemissions

 

Oh, BTW....WHEN/IF geo-engineering projects are actually underway? YOU, and everyone else, will know.

Yes, well you would know this because .... because ..... because why?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by vermonster

 

Sure. UAVs exist. They are well documented.

Now....research the payload capacites. Range. Duration. Combinaitons of all three factors. Oh, and altitude capablity.

The aircraft that are remotely pilotable can be researched, easily. Numbers, deployment arenas, etc. (Hint....most are in the Middle East Theater).

THEN....you also have every tool possible, online, to actually watch the live airplanes in flight, on your computer, and you see them visually in the sky above you.

Why won't a "chem"-trail believer just do that simple experiment?? No, they prefer not to....don't want to destroy their fantasies....

Are you trying to imply that aircraft cannot be remotely controlled because you cannot find a website that you trust to report on it ??

By the way did i tell you that i hate everyday normal condensation trails as much as the ones that are clearly more mixed with god knows what ??

I am finding it hard to believe that flying at the altitude that makes "condensation" trails FAR more likely is so that they can "save fuel". Please explain this theory , not sure who said it but it seems to fit your style of reporting.

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore


Are you trying to imply that aircraft cannot be remotely controlled because you cannot find a website that you trust to report on it ??

By the way did i tell you that i hate everyday normal condensation trails as much as the ones that are clearly more mixed with god knows what ??

I am finding it hard to believe that flying at the altitude that makes "condensation" trails FAR more likely is so that they can "save fuel". Please explain this theory , not sure who said it but it seems to fit your style of reporting.

Well, yes, remote control aircraft do exist, and yes sure it is possible to make some large aircraft into a remote control sprayplane. However, is there evidence it has been done? NO. Speculation is not evidence.

You dont think the reason jets fly up that high is about efficiency? Then why do you think passenger jets fly that high and always have when range and efficiency is important. Its not just jets either, turbocharged piston aircraft and turboprops fly higher too. There is just less drag up there, so they need less power, and also the thinner the air, the faster they can go, up until at least the maximum mach number is reached.

Jets flying up that high is not part of a conspiracy...And neither are contrails that form best around those altitudes, part of a conspiracy.

Originally posted by XLR8R
Ok I was looking around and I found this. Dunno if you ever saw it or someone posted it but I think it's obvious they are spraying something.

Proof they're saying something
Chemtrail chemical analisis

edit on 24-2-2011 by XLR8R because: (no reason given)

Thanks for this vid:www.youtube.com...

Priceless, this stuff is a FACT ladies n gents. Great vid, thanks again!

reply to post by SirClem


Please share with everyone just WHY that YouTube video is "proof"...in your own words.

Consider that video, again, in proper context. Then, I will explain it.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by unityemissions

 

Why can't the trails simply be geo-engineering?

More rational than "poison".
But of course, stillnot true. Just, at least not as "woo-woo"...
Oh, BTW....WHEN/IF geo-engineering projects are actually underway? YOU, and everyone else, will know.

Yes cause our Government tells us everything they do...
I nearly peed myself laughing weed...

reply to post by vermonster

if they can fly this by remote control, what makes you doubt a larger plane couldn't be controlled by remote?

I'm a little lost as to why flying the planes by remote is important...
It would still take a crew to do it so it wouldn't mean any less people were aware..

So what would be the point??

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SirClem

 

Please share with everyone just WHY that YouTube video is "proof"...in your own words.

Consider that video, again, in proper context. Then, I will explain it.

Once again whacker, you've usurped the documentation provided just to provide your own rehearsed opinion. Thanks for nada. I'm officially ignoring you after this post FYI; you just regurgitate every OS provided by TPTB & I've had enough of your disinfo.

YES, I SAID IT - DISINFO. Just don't come to my part of texas when you need a safe place when the SHTF; people here don't take to well to smart a$$es who deny what everyone else can blatantly see with their eyes.

Maybe one day you'll also quit believing you're a reptilian and change your signature.... Anyway, IGNORED.

Originally posted by SirClem

Originally posted by XLR8R
Ok I was looking around and I found this. Dunno if you ever saw it or someone posted it but I think it's obvious they are spraying something.

Proof they're saying something
Chemtrail chemical analisis

edit on 24-2-2011 by XLR8R because: (no reason given)

Thanks for this vid:www.youtube.com...

Priceless, this stuff is a FACT ladies n gents. Great vid, thanks again!

Its not Priceless, its worthless

First video was filmed by an ATS member doing a prank...They are flying through Cirrus clouds at times

Second video...68.8 parts per billion of barium is not unsafe, or unusual, and its under any kind of limit.

reply to post by GrinchNoMore


It's not a "theory", it's a fact of modern aviation, and turbine engines, and science and economics:

I am finding it hard to believe that flying at the altitude that makes "condensation" trails FAR more likely is so that they can "save fuel". Please explain this theory...

Every airline pilot (or any jet pilot too) knows this fact. It is one (of the many, many) things one learns, involving the reality of flight.

From a website that posts not as instructional content, but a handy refresher place to refer to...for pilots already trained and qualified. Everyone needs memory jogs, now and then. In this case, regarding the Boeing 757 (but is similar for all large/medium size jets):

Optimum Altitude

OPTimum altitude is the cruise altitude for minimum cost when operating in the ECON mode, and for minimum fuel burn when in the LRC or pilot-selected speed modes. In ECON mode, OPTimum altitude increases as either airplane weight or cost index decreases. In LRC or selected speed modes, OPTimum altitude increases as either airplane weight or speed decreases. On each flight, OPTimum altitude continues to increase as weight decreases during the flight.

For shorter trips (less than 250 nm), OPTimum altitude as defined above may not be achievable since the Top of Descent (T/D) point occurs prior to completing the climb to optimum altitude.

Trip altitude, as defined on the PERF INIT page, further constrains OPTimum altitude by reducing the altitude for short trips until minimum cruise segment time is satisfied. This minimum cruise time is typically one minute, but is operator selectable in the FMC by maintenance action.

Flight plans not constrained by short trip distance are typically based on conducting the cruise portion of the flight within plus or minus 2000 ft of OPTimum altitude. Since the OPTimum altitude increases as fuel is consumed during the flight, it is necessary to climb to a higher cruise altitude every few hours to achieve the flight plan fuel burn. This technique, referred to as Step Climb Cruise, is typically accomplished by initially climbing 2000 ft above OPTimum altitude and then cruising at that flight level until 2000 ft below optimum. For most flights, one or more step climbs may be required before reaching T/D. It may be especially advantageous to request an initial cruise altitude above optimum if altitude changes are difficult to obtain on specific routes. This minimizes the possibility of being held at a low altitude/high fuel consumption condition for long periods of time. The requested/accepted initial cruise altitude should be compared to the thrust limited or the manoeuvre margin limited altitudes. Remember, a cruise thrust limited altitude is dependent upon the cruise level temperature. If the cruise level temperature increases above the chart value for gross weight, maximum cruise thrust will not maintain desired cruise speed.

The is very technical stuff, but you can read much, much more....if you wish.....


Modern jets, nowadays, all have these computers (Flight Management Systems) on board to do a lot of the "thinking" and planning for the pilots. Before digital computers, though, there still was that "wetware" between our ears. It took planning, and accurate information, skill, experience and observation to determine most efficient ways to conduct a flight (IF that was your goal. In real world, there are other things to consider. IF you're running behind schedule, then sometimes you will sacrifice fuel economy, for more speed. Or, if it's the last leg of the trip, and you need to catch your flight home, since nearly everyone commutes to a different city than they are based at.....)

So, before those computer tools, there were various charts and graphs....whether made by Boeing or Douglas, or "hand-made" as in the example for a Boeing 727, below. Many of these sorts of "gouges" were quite common, in years past. The B-727 is, of course, no longer flying anywhere in the United States, or many other jurisdictions. Too noisy, to "thirsty", too old. They are still found in third world areas, Latin America and Africa, for instance....:



Take some time and study the info I've presented.....you will thus be better informed.

www.boeing.com...


Just a few that I found online....a deeper search might find more.....

An interesting Forum Q & A discussion:

www.aviationkb.com...

reply to post by backinblack


Laugh all you want.....as I said, any sort of geo-engineering plan WILL be commercialized.

There will be people champing at the bit to get into it, and they will find a way to bastardize it to make money...somehow, someway. AND, it will by the mere fact of its scope have to be INTERNATIONAL in nature. Crossing many national boundaries.

It will be well-publicized. There are no "covert" operations of any sort currently in existence.

HOW would they "hide" such things?? THINK on this, very, very hard. Where do you service, maintain, fill operate the airplanes from?? Airports "hidden" in the sky, out of view?

OR...on the ground. With all of the necessary support and personnel and facilities, etc. In full view. Don't you think there are millions of prying eyes, already???

Originally posted by SirClem

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SirClem

 

Please share with everyone just WHY that YouTube video is "proof"...in your own words.

Consider that video, again, in proper context. Then, I will explain it.

Once again whacker, you've usurped the documentation provided just to provide your own rehearsed opinion. Thanks for nada. I'm officially ignoring you after this post FYI; you just regurgitate every OS provided by TPTB & I've had enough of your disinfo.

YES, I SAID IT - DISINFO. Just don't come to my part of texas when you need a safe place when the SHTF; people here don't take to well to smart a$$es who deny what everyone else can blatantly see with their eyes.

Maybe one day you'll also quit believing you're a reptilian and change your signature....

Anyway, IGNORED.

edit on 26-2-2011 by SirClem because: edit grammar

Yes..documentation. Barium levels are considered safe when under 2ppm. If you look at the lab report in that news story that was just linked to, what does it show?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by backinblack

 

Laugh all you want.....as I said, any sort of geo-engineering plan WILL be commercialized.

There will be people champing at the bit to get into it, and they will find a way to bastardize it to make money...somehow, someway. AND, it will by the mere fact of its scope have to be INTERNATIONAL in nature. Crossing many national boundaries.

It will be well-publicized. There are no "covert" operations of any sort currently in existence.

HOW would they "hide" such things?? THINK on this, very, very hard. Where do you service, maintain, fill operate the airplanes from?? Airports "hidden" in the sky, out of view?

OR...on the ground. With all of the necessary support and personnel and facilities, etc. In full view. Don't you think there are millions of prying eyes, already???

edit on 26 February 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

You obviously didn't watch the evidence presented...again.... or you wouldn't have asked those questions. So for all you out there who somehow missed it, here it is:

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by weedwhacker

It will be well-publicized. There are no "covert" operations of any sort currently in existence.

You are delusional Weedwhacker..
Honestly, who the hell do you think you are to make such a statement??
Are you privy to ALL covert ops.??
Are you a Government agent weed..???

Here's Weather Modifcation's website. There's some interesting information about cloud seeding, the aircraft involded, and some of the weather modification projects taking place in the US and abroad. They also offer equipment to upgrade airplanes to make them capable of seeding.

www.weathermodification.com...

reply to post by SirClem


Calm down.....you'll blow a gasket.

....you've usurped the documentation....

"usurped"? NO...in fact, I will ADD to it for you. You ignored a request, RE: that video, but here goes anyway.....

The video was filmed at a place in North Dakota, outside Fargo, yes? Weather Modification Inc.

Their website: www.weathermodification.com...

Take a gander. Take off our shoes, sit a spell, and get comfortable. Get acquainted. Be sure to click on the "Aircraft" tab, from their homepage:

www.weathermodification.com...

Look up the specifications on those airplanes. Range, payload, altitude capability, etc. Some of them (the turbine-powered ones) can get pretty high....but, have relatively small payload ability. These are NOT responsible for the contrails people get all wadded up about! Contrails. NOT "cloud seeding" Very, very different things.

Originally posted by IndieA
Here's Weather Modifcation's website. There's some interesting information about cloud seeding, the aircraft involded, and some of the weather modification projects taking place in the US and abroad. They also offer equipment to upgrade airplanes to make them capable of seeding.

www.weathermodification.com...

Quite correct, and a good source to learn more about cloud seeding and the small planes used for it. Chemtrailers try to latch onto cloud seeding by small planes inside of storms, as evidence for large planes making chemtrails in blue sky, ignoring the fact that cloud seeding is done.....hang on....inside of clouds that are making thunderstorms and snowfall.

But its all by small planes that generally can not even get up to contrail altitudes anyways, nor is seeding ever done that high.

I'm merely supplying supporting evidence of weather modification taking place. The chemtrail situation is still a mystery. Here's a question. What might be the benefits of creating persistent contrails over an area of land? I know in Florida there are some hot days it would be nice to cloud up the sky. Maybe what people are calling chemtrails is the over use of contrails with or without added agents. I'm just speculating so don't go nuts.

reply to post by IndieA

What might be the benefits of creating persistent contrails over an area of land?

Minimal.

Because.....the only time that contrails, once formed, will continue to persist is when conditions are ripe anyways for other cirrus cluds to also form!!

No one seems to care about clouds. Contrails are just another type of cloud, pure and simple. Specifically, though....a cirrus type. Cirrus never, ever produce precipitation. They can't.

Originally posted by IndieA
I'm merely supplying supporting evidence of weather modification taking place. The chemtrail situation is still a mystery. Here's a question. What might be the benefits of creating persistent contrails over an area of land? I know in Florida there are some hot days it would be nice to cloud up the sky. Maybe what people are calling chemtrails is the over use of contrails with or without added agents. I'm just speculating so don't go nuts.

There is no benefit to it, its just something that happens in the right weather conditions. You can google "Appleman Chart" and see a graph that will show under what temperature and humidity, are contrails more likely.

asd-www.larc.nasa.gov...