This Forum Should Be Closed Down !

Originally posted by firepilot
Would you like to read a scientific report, that states exactly what I just said? What did you think of the photo?

You're missing the point here... I said this would be the next move. It's the old game of continually moving the goalposts.

The argument being used against chemtrails is that if there are real contrails then chemtrails must not exist, but that's no more logical than saying if real doctors exist then no fake doctors exist. All I'm saying is that both sides can make plausible rebuttals to the other and post links and videos and photos to support it. The chemtrail side acknowledges that there could be other explanations but the contrail side does not; the contrail side keeps demanding sources and we give them but it's never good enough. My personal experience is that the skies are always hazy, the jet trails in the sky do some pretty bizarre things I never saw them do till the last decade or so, I've seen "orbs" at close range that vanished before my eyes, and it isn't just me.

If WW still here can you tell me whats going on in this video ? They seem quite near ? Whats your opinion ? And i'm not beig flippant or clever i genuinely would like your opinion ?
Thanks in advance !

reply to post by ProRipp


All the more reasons to endure and persevere my friend. Don't mind the nay sayers. Ignore them and stop feuling their fires by replying.

reply to post by ProRipp


It's over 1,000 feet above. Consider that the first plane is something like a 747, with a wingspan of 200 feet, you can tell it's easily 1,000 feet up from the horizon, which is essentially at eye level with the first plane.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8e37bf4ba30f.jpg[/atsimg]

1,000 feet is the minimum vertical separation for planes. See:
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Zmurfix


No. It isn't different from 2001. It was different about 15 years ago. 2001 is actually when I started noticing a difference in the amount of trails overhead. It is different from when I was younger. I live in a really rural area (but near Tullahoma air base) and didn't realize how many times planes fly over our heads. Whether they're spraying chemicals or just jets trailing plain old water vapor, it still ticks me off when a day starts with a beautiful blue sky and ends with a muddy, hazy mess. There are far more of those days now than clear days.

There needs to be a study done on how this affects our environment no matter if they're technically harmless water vapor or not. That much moisture has to affect the weather some way. That's what I'm interested in seeing. Environmental studies or actual projects like the one I mentioned in the Middle East.

reply to post by James1982


Not to mention that the alleged sprayers would be contaminating the food and water supply that everyone, including the alleged sprayers and their employers families, ingest.

Makes no sense logically. I trust reason in the absence of real proof.

If you feel intimidated or ridiculed by my post then you read it wrong.

reply to post by Uncinus

Thanks for that but
What about the 2nd and 3rd planes altitudes ?

Peace

Originally posted by vermonster
When I see someone on a chemtrail thread deny chemtrails existence, I go to the members profile and then I look to see what they have recently posted. 9 times out of 10 it's just one post after another in various chemtrail threads.

It's alarming to me to see that there are apparently a good number of ats members who seem to only enjoy reading chemtrail threads and then expressing their disbelief in them......that doesn't sound like an interesting way to pass the time to me....

....seems like either they are not strong in their convictions or possibly there is another motive.

Thats pretty creepy dude.

Instead of stalking people that disagree with your beliefs, why dont you try and actually contribute to the debate.

For example, you could do some research and try to validate the claims made by believers, or you could try and refute claims made by debunkers.

All you are doing is making ad hominem attacks, and to be perfectly honest, thats pretty pathetic if thats all you can bring to the debate. What you are doing shows that you actually have very little knowledge of the subject being debated, and your only defense is to attack ones character, instead of the claims being made.

If you have a problem with the way certain members post, or have reason to feel that certain members are "shills", please report your feelings to the staff here, and they will take appropriate action.

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by Uncinus

 

Thanks for that but
What about the 2nd and 3rd planes altitudes ?

Peace

The second plane, which is also four engined, looks like it's at least twice as high as the first.

The third planes looks like it's at least 1000 feet below, and several miles off to the side.

Just busy airways, that's all.

Its just so painfully obvious a tiny smoke trail from such a miniscule area of the planetary atmosphere is the most efficient way of distributing anything that could have any effect, well, anything.

Where are all of the reports of local mysterious deaths directly related to atmospheric chemical spraying? There are none in populated centers, and if you say its in some 3rd world tiny village, I'd ask why? What benefit to anybody is there in spraying an unknown tiny village? There simply are no reputable sites in the civilized world.

If so link to places that don't have conspiracy, prison, god, skeptic, chem and the like in the web address.

OP, I feel what you're saying and I too have days when I think this site has gone to hell for those very things you mentioned. Well, if they were to close this forum they will eventually close all of the forums because those same people you're complaining about visit them as well. So here's the options, ignore those folks who work overtime to disrupt a topic (and threads) or close the entire site down. In spite of those who bring chaos to this site I often find out about information I would've never known about otherwise. Also when people throw light onto a subject, even though it may not be apart of the popular consensus of the thread, it just might be a link to truth or at the very least another perspective to consider.

reply to post by Illustronic


I thought myself i'd provided some pretty decent satellite imagery
to show how its done ?
If you'd care to go back some and take a look ?

Peace

Originally posted by SaberTruth
The chemtrail side acknowledges that there could be other explanations but the contrail side does not; the contrail side keeps demanding sources and we give them but it's never good enough.

Have you considered that it could be because your evidence actually isn't good enough, if your evidence is things like this:

Originally posted by SaberTruth
Here are some stills I shot a few years ago:
www.fether.net...

My YouTube video:
www.youtube.com.../a/u/1/67MKJZJE_6w

I live between an airport and an AFB, so I know what normal jets do. These are not normal.

reply to post by Chai_An


Thanks for that my friend, as I've said we can all be civil and respectful
and stop all the sniping and name-calling etc !
No-one wants to see anything closed down least of all me !


Peace

reply to post by ProRipp


most people unknowingly WANT to REMAIN ignorant

reply to post by ProRipp

...WW still here can you tell me whats going on in this video....

Sure. I have used many such videos, many times to try to point out the normalcy of contrails, especially from my vantage point, from the cockpit, over those many years....


This is being videoed by an Air India pilot, obviously because the person who posted it says so. I cannot tell where they are (what part of the world) but I can be quite certain that it is over land somewhere (as opposed to over the ocean) because of the radio.....since it's on the overhead speaker (typically, that's what we use rather than wearing a headset the entire flight. Personal choice, headsets are only required, per USA regulations, when below 18,000 feet. This is for the CVR and to get better voce recordings, from pilot's mouths).

The radio call from the FedEx flight, asking for an altitude change, is obviously on VHF, direct line-of-site communication. Over water, for voice, we use HF frequencies, when out of line-of-sight range of a land station. The audio quality is very different, and the format of the calls a bit different.


Anyway....1st jet (as Uncinus points out) is opposite direction, 1,000 feet above the Flight Level of the Air India jet.

2nd is along the same routing as first, but 1,000 above it....so, 2,000 feet above Air India.

3rd is diverging, opposite direction (another solid indication they are over land, and in a radar environment) and is either 1,000 or maybe 2,000 feet below the Air India. At distance, and angles, the exact height difference is hard to judge, since only 1,000 feet is not easy to gauge.

Just about ALL jets (any that fly into the USA and Canada, and in Europe) must have TCAS equipment, nowadays (Traffic Collision Avoidance System).

This depicts other flights, based on their transponder info, in a certain radius around each airplane. The distances vary, according to the brand your airline purchased and installed....my company's units went out to a 40 NM radius, and above/below by about 8,300 feet. So, using the TCAS we know well ahead of time of any approaching traffic....or any that we are overtaking, as the case may be. AND, the altitude, in relation to ours.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here, not the best or most professional video, but I searched for ones that pilots made showint their TCAS in action. Better than trying to type it all out for you:



That's one way of depicting TCAS, in that installation on that Airbus A320, for that airline. Aircraft targets are represented by an open diamond shape, until they get within a certain range of proximity, then it changes to a solid white diamond. The difference, in altitude, is shown next to it...1,000 below would be -10, if above would be +10, etc. When climbing/descending, there is an up,down arrow, and the numbers change to reflect the altitude difference from yours.


When a target is becoming a potential "threat" again, due to proximity algorithms, and trends that show a possible intersection (collision) the target symbol turns solid yellow, and the audio part enunciates "Traffic, Traffic!"

Maybe there's a video....let's see. This looks like simulator training, and yes modern sims have all the "bells and whistles" to make it as realistic as possible. Here, they included a "target" for TCAS activation. After the "yellow" alert, if it continues a threat, then the target turns red, and the audio announces an action for the pilot to take. In real life, the airplanes are talking to each other, and the other airplane gets opposite instructions:




BTW...in above video, after the "Descend!" audio alert from TCAS, the electronic warbling sound is the AutoPilot disconnect warning. (That version is typical of Airbus products, every make will have something similar, but different). Now, most pilots will cancel the alert, simply by pushing any of several buttons....but, it is common in simulator sessions (I have seen it all the time) that people get so focused on something, they don't even hear that annoying sound!! Human nature.....like the french fries alarm at McDonald's, a little bit .....

Originally posted by SaberTruth
reply to post by Essan

 

Just curious: if someone proved that two aircraft flying at the same altitude at the same time produced two very different trails, what excuse would you come up with? Different jet fuel perhaps? That is, how would your view that every single trail in the sky is "normal" be falsified? It would undoubtedly save some time and effort, thanks in advance.

In order to rationally discuss this, we have to clear up some misconceptions about aircraft operating at the "flight levels", that is, above 18,000 above sea levels (in the U.S. Other countries use the term flight levels for lower altitudes. Above 18,000, cruise altitude is based on Standard Atmospheric Pressure, i. e., an altimeter setting of 29.92 inches (760 millibars) of mercury or 101.325 kPa or 1013.25 millibars/hectopascal. So the actual altitude for 2 aircraft reporting the same altitude could be quite different. For a good comparison of two aircraft, they would need to be following the same constant isotherm.
And the atmosphere, even at high levels, is not one homogenous mass. I can tell you from experience that if an autopilot is set on "altitude hold," cruising mach speed will fluctuate a considerable amount as the aircraft goes from warmer to colder areas, and vice versa. Rather than constantly playing with the thrust levers (throttles) to maintain the desired speed, one can set the autopilot on "mach hold" and just let the aircraft hold a constant speed by gently climbing and descending. Of course, you have to get an ARTCC clearance to wander up and down in a block of airspace.

Originally posted by NightGypsy
reply to post by vermonster

 

It's alarming to me to see that there are apparently a good number of ats members who seem to only enjoy reading chemtrail threads and then expressing their disbelief in them......that doesn't sound like an interesting way to pass the time to me....

Vermonster, it shouldn't be that alarming to you. The chemtrail conspiracy comes complete with people paid to sit on their computers and debunk them. And the more political activism and awareness that results, the harder they are gonna be working to try to make people think that this scenario is scientifically improbable. Consider this....there are plenty of people who hold the same kind of positions these ATS "debunkers" claim to have that say chemtrails are real. It's the same situation with 9/11. The paid shills are abundant on threads on that topic always trying to claims their scientific knowledge confirms the O.S. If their scientific knowledge is so sound, then why are there so many others scientists, engineers, etc., that say the opposite?

They try to play on the general population's overall lack of knowledge of science and physics in attempt to manipulate people into focusing less on the other evidence that is less scientific. Not every single piece of evidence in either of these topics relies completely on science for it to be fact.

So, where are all these scientists and engineers, etc that say there is proof of chemtrails?

its actually the opposite of what you claim, some of us actually do have science backgrounds and tcontinually bring up science, whether it is chemistry, meteorology, etc, but it gets ignored with chemtrailers telling people to ignore it and to just "look up" and to rely on your feelings.

If you have science on your side, then why does science so easily debunk the chemtrail conspiracy each time. Why does a "movie" like What in the World Are They Spraying, try to create alarmism, with below normal levels of aluminum, and to claim that it should not be in the air, even though dust is going to be everywhere.

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
So the actual altitude for 2 aircraft reporting the same altitude could be quite different. For a good comparison of two aircraft, they would need to be following the same constant isotherm.

I think the question was about planes at the same approx place and time though, so they are pretty much going to be at the same altitude if reporting the same altitude when in approximately the same place. Otherwise planes would be crashing into each other all over the place.

Is it "isotherm" for a line of constant pressure? Wikipedia suggests "isostere"
en.wikipedia.org...