I've been watching planes lately

reply to post by ParkerCramer



It shows how perspective can line things up - I reckon all that has happened in that shot is that the perspective has lined up the contrails on the tail. Another shot 2-3 minutes later would probably show that they did not originate there.

There are numerous public shots of persective being used to "show" something being next to something else when they are nowhere near each other - people holding up the Leaning Tower of Pissa is a classic - like this one - great composition!

www.flickr.com...

reply to post by gmac10001


You still got some pretty good pics! Wow, still snow there! If it comes back here, I'm moving south, hehe.

I never have really noticed any that look to be falling, but I have also noticed that what tends to happen other places doesn't always happen here. The biggest city near me is Lexington, Ky. It's about 40 miles away. I'm really smack-dab in the boonies. I'm not complaining though... it's peaceful, for the most part. It's a good possibility there is other stuff going on and other places that I haven't seen here though.

I also wonder, when will it be illegal to take pictures of flying aircraft?...

reply to post by Mapkar


LOL! I think about that every single time I'm out taking pics of planes! I'm almost surprised that it isn't illegal already. I mean, I don't see what it's hurting, but there are so many other stupid laws popping up that not being able to photograph planes probably isn't too far away.

These are not natural contrails. There have been no chemtrails here (west of ireland) for the last 2 weeks. I put it down to there being an election and change of government last week. There have been fewer planes overflying and EVERY ONE left in its wake what you would consider a 'normal' contrail - short exhaust plumes, which vanish momentarily. This evening, plane numbers increased again and the huge trails returned. DON'T BELIEVE THE LIKES OF WEEDYWACKER, PILOT OR NO PILOT.

reply to post by NewlyAwakened

Let me just ask this simple question.
Do you think that the chemtrail skeptics here on ATS, I assume including yourself, provide a credible argument to the scientists and other professionals that put their NAME to their work while asserting that chemtrails exist?

I mean, really! We have the same few anonymous people on ATS "debunking" and ridiculing chemtrails, though I admit you are not one of them, but where is the credibility? Where is the balance?

I see chemtrails. I read evidence of what is being sprayed. I read why they MIGHT BE being sprayed, because it is all top secret crap, like the latest spy planes for instance. I read this from actual PEOPLE putting their name to their work. And then, for some reason, some ATS members think they have that sort of credibility, and think that they are bringing BALANCE to the subject.

Give me a break.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I am following your reasoning, but, the 2 photos you've injected were set up to fool the observer.........

Are you suggesting the OP did this?? I don't believe you are, so, what are the chances that the OP was in the exact right spot, at the exact right time to catch this as an anomoly???????????

I would think pretty astronomical!

Can you at least view this as not typical, and yes it does appear to be coming from the tail??

Not asking to you to change your world view, just excepting that it appears different?

Parker

Regarding the one that looks like it is spraying from the tail - hot air coming out of the engines takes a while to cool and condense - that is why there is always a gap between the engines and the contrails they generate. contails spread out and form clouds because the ice crystals they contain are good nucleation sites for other ice to form if the air is supersaturated - ie ice requires something to actually form on down to -42 deg C (ie at -42 water will spontaneously freeze without a nucleation site) - so without nucleation the atmosphere can actually contain a lot more moisture down to -42 than it can if there is nucleation - eg see the Wiki page on cloud physics - en.wikipedia.org... especially the section on supersaturation, and the Bergeron process the difficulties of photographing a/c and guessing heights are covered on this page - if you know sufficient data about your camera you can use image size as a rough and ready guide to altitude.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Thanks! I knew it was cold up there but I didn't know all the details. A physicist I am not, lol! I can make sense out of it when it is explained to me though.

I'll check out the wiki page. I'd really like to make an educated decision on this. I went through a phase of not believing in chemtrails at all and then almost believed, but now I'm back on the fence. Good scientific data is good though and exactly what I'm looking for, so I really appreciate your detailed response.

First, to the OP, outstanding pics and capturing of these things as they develop

reply to post by weedwhacker

Those are all perfectly normal contrails and cirrus clouds.

I think most of us know the difference between a perfectly clear day beginning to fill with natural cirrus clouds, versus clouds that form directly from contrails. It is my impression, from these pics and testimony, that there were no clouds, and that they formed straight from the contrails. What is my alternative opinion? I will bring over a post I made in a related thread:

This is what I am thinking too bm2, nothing intentionally nefarious, but this is my hypothesis in it all:
I think there are efforts to influence weather and/or climate. with good intentions, BUT, what worries me is that some chemical co. has worked their way into this issue, and sold something to a developing geo-engineering industry, convincing them that their product is beneficial. Now with any industry these days this concerns me.

Why? Because within that paradigm is where I start to worry about the effects of any chemicals used to "help" human kind/planet in any potentially dire climate challenges. Safety guideline compromise, chemical identification and cost cutting or lucrative profit margins is what worries me. I have seen, too often, profits come before people, and/or plain laziness too. I am thinking of the Gulf spill and the safety negligence involved with the alarms being disabled because they were disturbing people's sleep, or the acoustic monitors were passed up because of costs, AND how Haliburton used chems for fracking that were not okayed for safety because they were never disclosed due to trade secrets, what a fine loophole.Thread

So I think the chem ind has seen an opportunity to sale massive amounts of chems under the premise of being beneficial to us and the planet. Think of the money that could be generated. If we can think of it, you bet someone else in the industry has too. With some of these industries, it is almost as if they begin their designs or technology and think they can just deal with any problems as they arise, instead of waiting or determining the effectiveness and safety of what they are using. To reiterate my position, I don't think someone knows they are hurting people necessarily, but there are those that follow orders, thinking that what they are working with has been approved and is fine, effective and necessary. Right? Most employees aren't going to question the scientific validation of their company's product, that's what their scientists and, managers are for.

So my HYPOTHESIS regarding this matter is that the military and/or commercial airlines have been convinced(sold) of the notion that we must address climate issues, but the public need not know because of potential panic reactions. Lucrative contracts between military and chem co's may have occurred, because you know how aggressive marketer's can be, sell sell sell! The people involved with the dispersals, have been convinced they are harmless, but necessary.
Does this make any sense? I don't mean to veer off topic, but I felt compelled to respond to your comment because it resonates with my premise.

Peace,
spec
ETA: I feel I should include why I think anything unusual is occurring. I have seen the old footage/pics of contrails, but the only multiple ones that made criss crosses were groups of military planes in flight. I apprecite the notion of memories being fuzzy, but surely full sky criss cross patterns would have remained a childhood wonderment, just as clouds themselves have or the blue sky. You know how as a child you see your first few spider webs? Well you never forget that pattern, and I feel the full sky criss cross patterns would be permanently imprinted when I was a child, and I do not recall any, Additionally, I have wondered which came first, the multiple trails or the consp theories. I started noticing these things in 2000, 3 years before I ever even considered any conspiracies at all, other than the Kennedy Assassination and cannabis/hemp issues. So for me, it was the observation first, not the theory. So, how much has airplane traffic increased this century compared to the last decade of the last century? I am sure there has been an increase, but not enough to fill the skies. I have asked everyone in my family, particularly the elders, and none of them ever recall full criss cross patterns filling the skies, or watching a trail expand for hours to cover the sky.
Whew, finally got to make a full statement on my position...for what it's worth, there.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Geo-engeneering, including cloud seeding, which some claim are only on small scale operations, and that I beg to differ. As I mentioned above, I believe they have taken that tech to a more widespread level.

Last year, authorities ordered a record 840 flights in efforts to increase rain in 1.39 million square miles (3.6 million square kilometers) — roughly one-third of Chinese territory. They also fired 116,000 rockets and 890,000 artillery shells.

www.gmanews.tv...
But that is just part of the geo-engineering spectrum, and I think they are experimenting, not specifically with the intent to harm us so much, as an effort to generate sales in the chem industry.

The materials used in cloud seeding include two primary categories, tied to the type of precipitation process involved. One category includes those which act as glaciogenic (ice-forming) agents, such as silver iodide, dry ice and compressed liquid propane or carbon dioxide, which are appropriate in cloud systems where the precipitation process is primarily cold (colder than freezing). Of the ice-forming materials, the most commonly used is silver iodide. The second major category is focused on cloud systems where the warm (coalescence) process predominates. In those environments, hygroscopic (water attracting) materials such as salt, urea and ammonium nitrate can be utilized. Of the hygroscopic materials, the most commonly used are salts.

www.lightwatcher.com...
And this little gem from another source- sulfur hexafluoride

CONCLUSION:
Now this cloud-seeding weather mod is becoming big business, which is why I think some corps are pushing this tech beyond it's practicality, in pursuit of big dollars
www.weathermodification.com...
As to the dispersal methods, this is from their business page:
Dispersal Techniques

spec

I have been witnessing bright and sunny days turn overcast due solely to "c"-trails from planes. Not a single cloud in the sky, however, the "c"-trails turn into long, widening "clouds" and block the sky.

I am noticing it more and more. And if by coincidence or by plan, the trails systematically carpet the sky evenly... the whole sky.

I heard explanations ranging from normal contrail condensation, to depopulation programs, disease/cancer, blanketing view of humans from seeing "something" in the skies/cosmos, blanketing areas from satellite espionage, weather manipulation, and even the spraying of potions to cast spells.

Man... I don't know what they are, but I see them, and they are ruining some very beautiful and sunny days.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Ah, there you are! I knew you'd be here, lol.

What's the question??

The only question I had was why the contrail seemed to be coming straight out of the tail on the plane in the last pic and not in the other pics. But I think you said later on in the thread that it's perspective. I can see where perspective could make it look different than the others. When I was taking the pics, some planes were directly over my head, while others were off in the distance. I should have kept up with the direction and position of the planes in the sky, but I didn't.

From what you can tell, would you agree that the majority of these are commercial passenger jets?

reply to post by speculativeoptimist

I just want to say, I like your posts and your links.

It is a shame that you are made to feel like your links are worthless because you believe in chemtrails. But, inevitably, they will come and scoff.
Thanks for contributing!

reply to post by NewlyAwakened


I do have a decent video camera with twice the zoom of the camera I used to take the pics. What I lack is a GOOD tripod, but that may change soon. I may even pick up one tomorrow. I have recorded planes before... back before I even started questioning the whole chemtrail thing. The vids were shaky as hell though, and I'd really like to prevent that. I'll see what I can come up with.

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist

I think most of us know the difference between a perfectly clear day beginning to fill with natural cirrus clouds, versus clouds that form directly from contrails.

Sure - but clouds forming from contrails is normal - it is not natural - the contrails are clearly artificial - but the clouds forming from them is what you should expect if yuo dump a heap of ice crystals into supersaturated air.

As a later poster said - yes it can create cloud on a day that would otherwise be fine, and yes that can piss you off. And yes it is pollution - but the pollution is there whether the contrails form or not.

But it not something that requieres any additives to fuel or special aircraft.

Contrails making clouds was first (as far as I can see) written about by Antoine de Sant-Exupery in "Flight to Arras" - he wrote it in 1942 and here's what he said about flying high altitude recce missions over German troops in 1940:

The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud over the countryside.

Taken from findarticles.com... - part 1 is a fascinating read into early high altitude flying research too if you are an aerplane buff - findarticles.com...

Nor is it cloud seeding as you linked to for Weather Modification inc. - sure it is big business - but it is a business that does not operate in secret, nor does it use airliners on passenger and cargo flights - nor does it use military aircaft - they ahve a couple of bus-jets, otehrwise they areall twin-props - piston and turbo - www.weathermodification.com...

By all means protest about the spoling of your day - but if you insist upon saying that it is all teh fault of some global conspiracy you're not going to get anywhere - REAL science tells you why it hapens, and can be used to minimise it by getting airlines to stop flying at contrail-porducing altitudes as much as possible!

Originally posted by Stewie
Let me just ask this simple question.
Do you think that the chemtrail skeptics here on ATS, I assume including yourself, provide a credible argument to the scientists and other professionals that put their NAME to their work while asserting that chemtrails exist?

Talk is cheap.

Video evidence would be easy to produce by any mid-level enthusiast with an average job who spends a modest amount of disposable income on his hobby. I can only assume it's been tried and, since there was nothing interesting to see, nothing got put on the web. Of course there are other explanations.

BTW, when you work in science, you learn not to trust scientists. They are just as biased as any other human being, only they can cause more damage, because it's so easy to slap your "Ph.D." after your name when you speak on a subject of which you have no knowledge. It works even better when the subject is broadly within your field (i.e. someone with a "Ph.D. in aeronautics" might work only on navigation systems yet proudly offer all his precious opinions on jet exhaust condensation, opinions whose source he does not remember so he assumes were the result of his extensive education, but which actually came from a Discovery Channel special he watched 6 years ago).

So yeah, multiple high-res close-up vids of different planes or it didn't happen. Again, in this day and age, they should already be there, and all over the Internet. Offer any excuse you'd like for their lack, but it'll be hard to find one that is better than "it's probably just not happening."

I mean, just look at what we have for 9/11 (something on which I'm a lot less skeptical of a conspiracy of some sort).

Could not agree more Mr. Whacker.......................Perspective..................Ours vs. Yours 2nd

reply to post by ParkerCramer


Mr. Whacker. HA HA! Sorry, that was funny.

Originally posted by gemineye
I do have a decent video camera with twice the zoom of the camera I used to take the pics. What I lack is a GOOD tripod, but that may change soon. I may even pick up one tomorrow. I have recorded planes before... back before I even started questioning the whole chemtrail thing. The vids were shaky as hell though, and I'd really like to prevent that. I'll see what I can come up with.

Starred. Would love to see it!

No, the latter wouldn't convert anybody who elevates the ego of "skepticism" to the level of religion.

reply to post by NewlyAwakened


Not trying to convert anyone. I don't even know where I stand myself. Just thought that one looked different than the others, and wondered why, considering that most of the pics were taken over the course of two days, with very similar weather. The perspective probably was different though. I'm not positive, but I *think* that last pic *may* have been taken right over my head. A few of the others, but not all, were also over my head. I'm thinking very few though. Most were off in the distance. The one with the reddish colored fuselage was directly over my head, I know. I remember that one.

reply to post by Stewie

Thanks for the kind words Stewie, and I don't feel insulted. For the most part everyone is cordial, with the exception of a little pugilistic jabbing every now an then. I think people just get tired of the same arguments, and some can not match the theories or debunking with what they are seeing. I just can't buy the notion of nothing is going on and nothing is different than the latter part of the last century. The snide remarks, meh, let em' roll like water off of a duck's back, and may our skin become thicker, so that we are not emotionally thrown off of the truth pursuit.
I also think much of the reason the critics sound tired in their statements is because they are generalizing all/most rebuttals as the same old argument. The gov's trying to kill us by spraying poison on us. I once thought that too, but had to dig in for more truth, and my post above is where I am at with things for now. Although, honestly, their is a small part of me that will entertain that idea too(killing us off), but not enough to make me fight for it.

Peace,
spec

reply to post by NewlyAwakened

Okay, I get it.
Scientists can't be trusted. Well, where does that leave you?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Sure - but clouds forming from contrails is normal

That is your opinion, and I respect it, but I also disagree. I know they can/do make cloud(ish) formations, but I and many others will stand behind the idea that they have never taken hours upon hours, AND left the sky covered so that the sun can't be seen. I live atop a mountain, and for 8 years, just like the OP's pics, I have watched these things ALL DAY, and so I disagree friend.

spec