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.

 

Chemtrails explained. (with visual aid)

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by iversusvsversusi
 


I see this argument at least every other day. The so-called patterns, like "x" or "checkerboard", or "grid" or "triangle" are nothing more than contrails of planes flying in different directions. Routes do cross, wind does make them drift, so each contrail will have moved a bit before the next plane passes through.
If you think about a plane leaving a contrail flying N-S, and then a plane flying E-W, you get a cross or "x". Because plane routes are used by more than one plane, multiple passes will create a "grid". If one happens to be flying SW-NE through the same area, you will get a triangle.
And in the last 20 years, there are more planes flying more routes and cleaner fuel and more efficient engines. Just like everything else in the world, technology advances. So you will see more contrails on a regular basis.




posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by OleMB
Seems like people think that those believing in chemtrails deny contrails, and that's not the case; contrails exist without any doubt. We know. You showing us that they exist have no application.


My thoughts exactly.

What about cloud seeding, silver iodide? Is every contrail a chemtrail? Heck no.

But chemtrails (as in spraying chemical from the sky) is REAL




posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


reply to post by network dude
 


yeah the chemtrail thing has gotten blown way out of hand, i beleive its simple, geo-engineering being done without the research of the consequences, but your absolutely right, and this is just my theory, and doesnt stand up to speculation without solid proof. we certainly need evidence linking geo engineering to the rise in aluminum and other chemicals in the enviroment, but to give my theory some credibilty, if you notice on the second video i posted at 5:22, they are basically telling us that they are going to go ahead with geo engineering(none admit to it going on now), even without the proper research on aluminum, for the greater good, but dont worry even though we havent run tests yet we eventually will. now that disturbed me a little. but S&F for ya, people need to be educated, and i belive something is goin on, just not the way chemtrails is being termed and warped by most, and knowbody is gonna be able to do anything about it unless the truth comes out, and thats never gonna happen as long as people chase these wild speculations of world depopulation by chemtrails, to get to the bottom of this we need to realize whats really goin on and not base it on wild speculations, and learn the truth, get evidence to back it up then go from there. good post, youve convinced me chemtrails are not what they are being claimed to be. i do on the other hand beleive geo engineering without research is treading on dangerous grounds for us all.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Isn't chemtrails meant to make us zombie like ?
This is not well working I think....well I ' ve seen some cases



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Signals

What about cloud seeding, silver iodide? Is every contrail a chemtrail? Heck no.


cloud seeding looks nothing like contrails, and isnt' done from airliners.


But chemtrails (as in spraying chemical from the sky) is REAL



In a trivial sense, yes it is - agricultural spraying of weed killer, seeds, fertiliser, firefighting with flame retardants and water, even pollution from engine exhaust all qualifies as "spraying chemicals from teh sky".

but that's not what the chemtrail hoax is supposed to be about.

I prefer to ask believers what is their actual evidence that they are real.

It's a lot simpler to point them to the inaccuracies in the existing "evidence" and ask them to come back when they have something that is verifiable.
edit on 28-2-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: fix quote



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by network dude
 




Could the increase in reported questionable trails be a symptom of something bigger? Could the very makeup of the upper atmosphere be changing? Man made or natural, how would we know? We're at the bottom of the ocean down here, would you even be able to tell if something was changing in the upper levels?

Could all of this merely be a change in the conditions?


Anyone who regularly flies would know. A lot of people think that the air they breathe at 39,000 feet in an airliner is somehow generated in the aircraft by something carried aloft. It's not, except for the emergency oxygen used if pressurization fails. It is the outside air that is sucked into the engine and compressed by the compressor section of the engine. It is then bled out of the engine and mixed (several was to do that) with the cold (-55F or so) ambient air so the passengers don't fry, (or more correctly, bake) in the cabin.
So, if the upper atmosphere changes, that is what people are breathing. Oxygen content of the atmosphere is fairly stable at 21% from sea level to about 70,000 feet.
edit on 28-2-2011 by 4nsicphd because: typo



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by network dude
 




Could the increase in reported questionable trails be a symptom of something bigger? Could the very makeup of the upper atmosphere be changing? Man made or natural, how would we know? We're at the bottom of the ocean down here, would you even be able to tell if something was changing in the upper levels?

Could all of this merely be a change in the conditions?


Anyone who regularly flies would know. A lot of people think that the air they breathe at 39,000 feet in an airliner is somehow generated in the aircraft by something carried aloft. It's not, except for the emergency oxygen used if pressurization fails. It is the outside air that is sucked into the engine and compressed by the compressor section of the engine. It is then bled out of the engine and mixed (several was to do that) with the cold (-55F or so) ambient air so the passengers don't fry, (or more correctly, bake) in the cabin.
So, if the upper atmosphere changes, that is what people are breathing. Oxygen content of the atmosphere is fairly stable at 21% from sea level to about 70,000 feet.
edit on 28-2-2011 by 4nsicphd because: typo


that's not entirely correct.
Here is a calculator to figure oxygen percentage at different altitudes. This explains why it's harder to breath when you are at the top of a very high mountain, as opposed to at sea level.

Chemtrails are fantasy.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by epicfail
 


You are talking different things - %, and total amount.

It is correct in that oxygen is always about 21% of the air at any altitude - you are referring to air density - at 10,000m ther is a lot less air in a cubic metre than at sea level, so less oxygen in total - but it is the same proportion.

So when the air at high altitude is compressed, by jet engines for example, the proportion of oxygen remains 21%, and because it is compressed it is dense enough to support life.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


see, that's why I decided to make an account here. I get to learn stuff and I don't have to pay for classes.
thanks.
edit on 28-2-2011 by epicfail because: because chemtrails are fantasy



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Yes...this confuses a lot of people. The percentage is about the same...it is pressure that matters, though, to living, breathing creatures (like us).

This is referred to as the "partial pressure of oxygen", in order to properly oxygenate the blood, to sustain life. This is why, for instance, during the early manned spaceflight programs (Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and even the Soviets' efforts) 100% oxygen was used....because, then the actual total environmental pressures could be reduced greatly....to between 3.5 to 5 PSI. This made the spacecraft lighter (easier to contain 5 PSI, than 14.7 PSI), and made the EVA suits (spacesuits) less inflated, and easier to move the elbow, knee, finger joints, etc.

Today, the Space Shuttle (R.I.P., only two more launches) has the crew cabin pressurized to normal Sea Level, 14.7 PSI, with the oxygen/nitrogen and CO2 mix we have here. The added weight penalty is worth the increased safety, and convenience....100% O2 is hazardous. For their EVA activities, they have to "pre-breathe" pure O2 for a while, to clean out the nitrogen in the bloodstream. Because, as in the Apollo era, the EVA suits still are run on 100% O2, at low pressure.


What is Partial Pressure?:

it's the individual pressure exerted independently by a particular gas within a mixture of gasses. The air we breath is a mixture of gasses: primarily nitrogen, oxygen, & carbon dioxide. So, the air you blow into a balloon creates pressure that causes the balloon to expand (& this pressure is generated as all the molecules of nitrogen, oxygen, & carbon dioxide move about & collide with the walls of the balloon). However, the total pressure generated by the air is due in part to nitrogen, in part to oxygen, & in part to carbon dioxide. That part of the total pressure generated by oxygen is the 'partial pressure' of oxygen, while that generated by carbon dioxide is the 'partial pressure' of carbon dioxide. A gas's partial pressure, therefore, is a measure of how much of that gas is present (e.g., in the blood or alveoli).


Read more here.

What is not mentioned, but is ever-present too, is water vapor. Hence, CONtrails. The amount of water vapor (and temperature, plays a role too) determines whether they will form, and how they will look, and their duration as well....



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 

The Chemtrail issue is so subjective because we all wonder, "What is the reason behind the whole spraying?". Is it to make us sick, so that we must depend on big pharma, help with global warming, etc, etc. Theories are out there and this conspiracy has been difficult to establish because there do not seem to be any hidden identity whistleblowers that come forward, no Bob Lazars. I do think there may be some adverse reactions that sensitive people have to the 'ingredients' contained but I'm not sure that it has anything to do with making everyone sick.

Some people scoff that, well even Pelosi and the PTB are breathing the stuff, too. Why would they allow it if it may endanger them or their families health. Well, there may be chemicals that once breathed in or ingested through water can react with all of these "beneficial vaccines" the PTB want to pump into the useless eaters, us sheeple. Maybe the PTB are advised, yeah, don't get that vaccine, it reacts with the barium or whatever is in the trails. Not sure. Careful when the vaccines become mandatory.

My take is a little far out there, I know. The mysterious trail that was spat out on November 30, 2010, www.youtube.com... I think was not from a submarine but it was a "normal" Chemtrail, albeit a bit thick. Ms. Rodham-Clinton turned on the dis-information faucet to
"drip mode", putting little seeds that people recall later. Info like maybe the Chinese were exhibiting a show of force. No. Was it our sub, show of force since our esteemed leader was in Asia at that time. No. Uh, the airplane from Hawai'i. No.
I think that these chemtrails may aid UFOs in cloaking themselves. We are in an age of cameras everywhere, before people could only describe what they saw, now there is a little more proof. I can't find the pictures of the 'hole punch' cloud that several different people saw over Rosedale, CA and in the surrounding area, this was after the November trail. Maybe a big mothership was transiting and needed additional cloaking assistance. Who knows, I said it was far out. Oh, and the Chemtrails used to hang out for over 8 hours at times, now I think with a lot of people looking up, they have added an additional dispersant because they disappear quicker now. When they disperse the fan out like the "clouds" (rather anti-clouds you see the weird puff ball look. Check this site out. www.weathervortex.com...

I don't know if it is my router or what? But this link I looked at a while ago, it was fine. Now I see that it is garbled at times, i'm beginning to see that a lot with sometimes controversial things on youtube. Am I the only one seeing this. Hope you guys can take a look . www.youtube.com... Can't wait to hear other thoughts. Thanks for the forum, ATS



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaabe41
The Chemtrail issue is so subjective


No it isn't - it is completely objective - if they are spraying "something" then it msut be measureable - go measure it!



because we all wonder, "What is the reason behind the whole spraying?".



That presupposes "something" is being "sprayed" - perhaps yuo shoudl establish that spraying is actually happening 1st....



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
I would be more apt to listen to the discussions and entertain the idea that possibly, somewhere in the world, planes are spraying, if anyone was to bring something to the table in terms of evidence. Air samples at altitude, tail number of a spraying plane, pictures of the spraying apparatus, something other than lame videos, and poor science. There is no solid idea as to what this conspiracy entails. I just keeps sounding more paranoid as the theories come out.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
I for one see it as obvious that something is being left behind aircraft that completely covers the sky in a thick haze. (i live just northeast of Philadelphia) Call it whatever you want, but if buses completely covered the streets with a thick cloud of exhaust to the point you couldn't see, I'm sure people would be up in arms and not just brushing it off as nothing.
.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
I am not on either side of the chemtrail or no-chemtrail fence. I honestly don't think I have enough information to decide. But, one question that another poster brought up...and probably a million others is this

WHY would TPTB, government, military, pilots (whomever you believe is behind the chemtrails) be spraying this stuff when they themselves will be exposed, their children, their wives, brothers, sisters, friends etc etc etc???

Until someone can come up with a LOGICAL explanation for that, I'm leaning towards the "non" side!

Michelle



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


Uh...I hate to say it, but the theory is that the chemtrails are just 1 part of a binary or even trinary drug/disease/whatever - you only get sick/dead/mind-controlled if you take the other part(s) - which is, of course some combination of vaccine/fluoride/pick-a-conspiracy-theory-to-do-with-NWO-killing-every-one-off.

And of course the people who want to contro lte hworld dont' take the 2nd part while all us sheeple do.

And yes I know there's no evidence for the rest of it either....but, sadly, I have seen people say that that is what it is all about!!




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


Uh...I hate to say it, but the theory is that the chemtrails are just 1 part of a binary or even trinary drug/disease/whatever - you only get sick/dead/mind-controlled if you take the other part(s) - which is, of course some combination of vaccine/fluoride/pick-a-conspiracy-theory-to-do-with-NWO-killing-every-one-off.

And of course the people who want to contro lte hworld dont' take the 2nd part while all us sheeple do.

And yes I know there's no evidence for the rest of it either....but, sadly, I have seen people say that that is what it is all about!!



I was pretty sure that was going to be the arguement thrown out there..something along the lines of "the families/friends/neighbours of the people doing this all take some sort of antibiotic or medicine so they don't get sick". Thinking of my own circle of friends and family...that'd be a HUGE amount of people to 'let in' on the secret and I know for a fact one would say something somewhere to someone. I'm still waiting for the "LOGICAL" explanation



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


Uh...I hate to say it, but the theory is that the chemtrails are just 1 part of a binary or even trinary drug/disease/whatever - you only get sick/dead/mind-controlled if you take the other part(s) - which is, of course some combination of vaccine/fluoride/pick-a-conspiracy-theory-to-do-with-NWO-killing-every-one-off.

And of course the people who want to contro lte hworld dont' take the 2nd part while all us sheeple do.

And yes I know there's no evidence for the rest of it either....but, sadly, I have seen people say that that is what it is all about!!



now that is a completely new theory. What do you suppose the ultimate plan is, to increase paranoia? It sure is working.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 06:00 AM
link   
There's not a logical explanation thats werer it falls into the cult/ religion catagory. They ignore all the facts offer no proof but tell non believers they are the crazy ones. What's that sound like to you.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by epicfail

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by network dude
 




Could the increase in reported questionable trails be a symptom of something bigger? Could the very makeup of the upper atmosphere be changing? Man made or natural, how would we know? We're at the bottom of the ocean down here, would you even be able to tell if something was changing in the upper levels?

Could all of this merely be a change in the conditions?




that's not entirely correct.
Here is a calculator to figure oxygen percentage at different altitudes. This explains why it's harder to breath when you are at the top of a very high mountain, as opposed to at sea level.

Chemtrails are fantasy.


You are absolutely wrong about O2 percentage. What you linked to is a pressure calculator. The percentage of oxygen stays constant at about 20.9% from sea level to about 70,000'. Look at www.allstar.fiu.edu... Of course, if you knew how to calculate the root mean square velocities of diatomic oxygen and nitrogen, it would be obvious to you. What the little caculator you linked to does is to calculate the partial pressure of oxygen at different altitudes. At sea level total atmospheric pressure is about 760mm Hg, or 760 millimeters of mercury, so the partial pressure of ambient oxygen is about 160mm Hg. Why that concept is important is that the partial pressure of oxygen decreases as you increase altitude. So, when the partial pressure of oxygen in the atmosphere decreases to a point where it is less than the O2 partial pressure in the lungs, which is, for an average healthy person, about 100 mm Hg, the lungs oxygenate the atmosphere instead of the other way around, and you suffer hypoxia. (Without pressurization,above 10,000 feet you are not getting enough oxygen to fully oxidize the fuels to keep your brain working correctly and above 18,000 you start losing whatever oxygen you have stored in your hemoglobin. At about 63,000 feet, the partial pressure of arterial gases in your blood, particularly nitrogen, exceeds ambient pressures, sending gas bubbles boiling out of your blood into heart, brain, joints, etc.)You can defend against hypoxia by anything that increases or maintains the O2 partial pressure, either compressing the ambient air or increasing the concentration of O2 with supplemental oxygen, or both, by using a pressure oxygen system.
You are correct about chemtrails, though.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join