Chemtrail Debunkers....

Click here for more information.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


You really seem quite clueless. It's so funny that you think you disproved something I said.

What do you think you disproved about SF6 or hygroscopic seeding being used as chemtrails?

Almost everything you posted supports exactly what I said. More chemicals being sprayed from planes

I just cannot get how someone only sees what he wants.Some of the research from certain members(mattie (cough) that he thinks helps him actually hurts him because the instead of reading what he wants to post he just throws it against the wall and whatever sticks he posts.

How ironic.

Originally posted by charlespearl
reply to post by MathiasAndrew

 

Air Weather Service was created in 1937 and is now know as, of 1997, Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) are the command and control structure of Chemtrails and Weather Modification

Save the documents before they are deleted. They have been doing it for over 50 years. They put chaff and other radar tracers in it so they can trace the Chemtrails on radar. Remember that! Only the military can perform this type of operation. Please read the documents listed below to understand it.

Technical Report 177 An Introduction to Weather Modification

www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=AD0696619

The Air Weather Service mission includes the field testing and operational application of weather-modification techniques.

1999: A review of Cloud Seeding Experiments to Enhance Percipitation and Some New Prospects

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.172.5373&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Substantial work has also been conducted in the past 10 years regarding the dispersion and transport of seeding material in both convective and orographic clouds.

The use of tracer material to tag a seeded region has been particularly helpful in this effort. The two tracer materials that are used most often are chaff and SF6. Both materials could be released from either the air or the surface.

The dispersion and transport of the chaff is monitored by radar, while the detection of the SF6 is usually conducted with aircraft equipped to detect it at very low concentrations. (Stith et al. 1990; Klimowski et al. 1998).

1980 State Water Survey Division ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES SECTION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: CRITERIA FOR WEATHER MODIFICATION OPERATIONS AND EFFECTIVE EVALUATION

www.isws.uiuc.edu/pubdoc/CR/ISWSCR-240.pdf

D. Designation of cloud treatment techniques.

1. Seeding agent(s) to be employed.

2. Method of transfer to clouds (aircraft, ground generators, or others).

3. Location of seeding in cloud (base, mid-level, top, other).

4. Method of dispersal into cloud (Agl generator, flares, rockets, dry ice dispenser, etc.).

5. Time(s) of day seeding is to be performed (if selective).

6. Duration of seeding in each operation.

E. Requirements for facilities and equipment.
1. Operational center.
2. Meteorological equipment.
3. Aircraft.
4. Ground generators.
5. Seeding devices.

F. Personnel.
1. M e t e o r o l o g i s t ( s ) .
2. A i r c r a ft crew.
3. I n s t r ume nt t e c h n i c i a ns and o b s e r v e r s.

G. Measurements to be made.
1. Meteorological.
2. Aircraft.
3. Radar.
4. Other.

Internet Trolls and Chemtrail sprayers... Besides if it is good for us why don't you let us know. Unless... you have something to hide...

Keep spraying and I will keep posting. Note taken: I guess you do work on the weekends....

Interesting, I almost think a thread that deals soley with weather and and climate modification would be good, this IMO is likely the largest part of the operations many call 'chemtrails'. Too, if researchers could post pictures and info of how these trails (whether one believes they are just 'accidental' or by design) are actually affecting the weather then I think that would be a good start to more understanding. Clearly to me huge portions of the U.S. are under almost constant jet made cloud masses as shown by sattellite footage, and though 'intent' is hard to prove it appears to me these flight paths, how and where they are located and how they start and stop, etc. to generate cloud banks for weather control through possible seeding techniques are anything BUT 'accidental'.

Originally posted by Tecumte

Clearly to me huge portions of the U.S. are under almost constant jet made cloud masses as shown by sattellite footage,

clearly not - rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov...

contrails are intermittant, transitory, and vastly outweighed in area coverage by "normal" clouds and "blue sky".

and though 'intent' is hard to prove it appears to me these flight paths, how and where they are located and how they start and stop, etc. to generate cloud banks for weather control through possible seeding techniques are anything BUT 'accidental'.

Well let's see how that would work....

"Chemtrails" are at jet cruise altitudes (typically 30,000 -40,000 feet) and are cirrus clouds.

Cloud seeding is mostly done by piston engined a/c into cumulonimbus clouds, which typically occur between 500-13,000 feet, occasionally 20,000 feet, and exceptionally 75,000 feet.

cumulonimbus clouds are seeded because they contain a great deal of moisture - they thick and "fluffy" - the type of cloud that makes up thunderstorms.

Cirrus clouds, including those induced by contrails, are thin and wispy. They typically appear before a storm front as temperatures drop in the upper atmosphere.

so you are positing that they are making a cloud that is not useful for seeding, does not produce rain, at an altitude where cloud seeding never takes place.

Hmm.........sorry - I don't see how that's going to be useful for anything at all

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew

What do you think you disproved about SF6 or hygroscopic seeding being used as chemtrails?

I think the problem here is one of difference of definition.

You define chemtrails as any substance dispersed into the atmosphere at any altitude by human activity under any circumstance for any reason and usually invisible from the ground.

Everyone else defines chemtrails as prominent clearly visible lines, resembling contrails, extruding from aircraft in the mid to upper troposhere which persist and may then spread across the sky.

The argument everyone else is involved in is whether these lines are indeed just contrails as meteorologists and aviators claim or whether they are something else. Your consistent attempts to derail threads by posting a mass of irrelevant disinformation does not exactly help anyone reach a conclusion on the matter. But maybe that's the point?

reply to post by MathiasAndrew

What do you think you disproved about SF6 or hygroscopic seeding being used as chemtrails?

You are the one who says they are part of chemtrails...

They are all being used and are all part of what people call chemtrails.

Can we get a link to this info?

Here's a site with a huge amount of links and material on weather modifiction that some might find useful:

agriculturedefensecoalition.org...

when any jet engine or recip burns hydrocarbon fuel it emits carbon dioxide and water vapor lots of it.
this water vapor can only condense behind the engine and form water vapor trails it must happen
we call them contrails. however since water vapor is techically a chemical i guess you could call water vapor
a "chemtrail". i cannot state this more simply. this is so basic i cant believe someone would think otherwise.
again the fuel is a hydrocarbon lots of carbon and hydrogen atoms. it burns and forms lots of water vapor and carbon dioxide. it hits below zero temps and condenses. end of story.

reply to post by jetmech


We all know what a Contrail is. Thanks for the useless information.

if it looks like and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck is what i am saying.

there is really nothing to debunk. how can one debunk an assertion?

i pour a glass of water and you say "its not water". so we could go on endlessly
arguing duck season rabbit season! i have seen all the pictures of what i see as contrails (water vapor)
you say they are chemtrails.

until YOU prove to me by some chemical test that i do not have a glass of water or that contrails are
chemtrails i can only go my way believing that contrails (stuff we see emmitted by aircraft engines)
are simple water vapor as they are expected to be because we know water vapor is a byproduct of exhaust. until that point this is just a pointless duck season rabbit season argument.

reply to post by jetmech

i pour a glass of water and you say "its not water". so we could go on endlessly arguing duck season rabbit season! i have seen all the pictures of what i see as contrails (water vapor) you say they are chemtrails.

What if you pour a glass of water and it takes second to spill out, and then you pour another glass of water and it takes 30 seconds to pour out.

You might begin to suspect that your glass of water might be something other than just plain water.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


lol - it took you 6 months to come up with that??

How about if 1 glass of water evaporates in 10 minutes, and another in 3 hours.....you say there's clearly something in there other than water....I say the 1st glass is in a hotter room with lower humidity.....

There...that's much more appropriate, since contrails form or do not form based on temperature & humidity- large pdf download - since you do not like me making assertions...

BTW you might find this interesting...it's from SwissAir..

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by jetmech

 

i pour a glass of water and you say "its not water". so we could go on endlessly arguing duck season rabbit season! i have seen all the pictures of what i see as contrails (water vapor) you say they are chemtrails.

What if you pour a glass of water and it takes second to spill out, and then you pour another glass of water and it takes 30 seconds to pour out.

You might begin to suspect that your glass of water might be something other than just plain water.

So if snow in my yard from one storm, melts in a morning, and from the next storm, the snow is around for a week, should i decide that one of those storms was really not snow but a chemical flakes in my yard?

reply to post by firepilot


You could suspect that someone came along and threw a bunch of chemical salt on the snow that melted faster.

So in this case the the hygroscopic salt is not absorbing the moisture from the air ..instead it is absorbing the moisture from the snow.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by firepilot

 

You could suspect that someone came along and threw a bunch of chemical salt on the snow that melted faster.

So in this case the the hygroscopic salt is not absorbing the moisture from the air ..instead it is absorbing the moisture from the snow.

Wow...

Or just maybe, some days are warmer than other days, some days are sunnier than other days. Some days the snow will melt, and some days it will not.

No conspiracy needed.

Originally posted by Tecumte
Here's a site with a huge amount of links and material on weather modifiction that some might find useful:

agriculturedefensecoalition.org...

edit on 29-4-2011 by Tecumte because: link added

Oh thats just chemmies being disingenuous, and trying to not look like chemmies. They are trying to look appear to be an environmental group that is in different causes, when its in reality nothing but a chemtrail site.

Its funny about this "coalition". A coalition is when multiple groups and people come together. Not just one person making a website and inviting others to join in. Agricultural Defense Coalition is just a second version of the California Skywatch site, that is meant to fool people and bring them into chemtrails.

The website for "Environmental Voices" does the exact same thing. Tries to look like a site that advocates environmental concerns, when it is nothing but shilling for chemtrails.

havent read the entire threaad, why?
cuz i finally see the thruth thankst to ats debunkers
i thought chemtrails might be true
but know i see how sad i was. thanks, ats[debunkers]
waiting to be called a disinfo, roflmao[i
i am the bigest conspiracy nut ever, really ,so if im wrong show me proof
but ther isnt any ,nuff said

Chemtrails is just contrails and a specific atmosphere

i still believe in nessie biffoot and ebe
but chemtrails lol
give it a rest

i was on board not so long ago ,so not hating
but some people well i see now ur being taking for a lonnnnngggg ride

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew

What do you think you disproved about SF6 or hygroscopic seeding being used as chemtrails?

I think the problem here is one of difference of definition.

You define chemtrails as any substance dispersed into the atmosphere at any altitude by human activity under any circumstance for any reason and usually invisible from the ground.

Everyone else defines chemtrails as prominent clearly visible lines, resembling contrails, extruding from aircraft in the mid to upper troposhere which persist and may then spread across the sky.

The argument everyone else is involved in is whether these lines are indeed just contrails as meteorologists and aviators claim or whether they are something else. Your consistent attempts to derail threads by posting a mass of irrelevant disinformation does not exactly help anyone reach a conclusion on the matter. But maybe that's the point?

Is he the same guy that was telling us that air show planes and forest fire aircraft are part of "chemtrails" too?

reply to post by firepilot


And the space shuttle too - the space shuttle exhaust is a chemtrail according to Matty:

here's the list...www.abovetopsecret.com...

EXAMPLES of chemtrails

1 ) Space Shuttle exhaust

2 ) Chemical dumping for extinguishing fires

3 ) Fuel dumping for emergency and other required scenarios

4 ) ICBM exhaust other military rockets

5 ) Cloud seeding by plane and other cloud seeding methods (rockets)

6 ) Other methods used for aerosol Geo engineering (ex. balloons)

7 ) Jet exhaust with anomalous persistent contrails