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.

 

Implanted memories of Blue Skies

page: 20
24
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
eye witness statements wouldn't be admissible in court.


Sure, but that does not mean it's always right either:

en.wikipedia.org...


The Innocence Project has facilitated the exoneration of 214 men who were convicted of crimes they did not commit, as a result of faulty eyewitness evidence.


en.wikipedia.org...


Many experts have accumulated evidence suggesting that eyewitness memory is volatile Variability in eyewitness memories can be influenced by episodic memory systems, photographic memory, age, facial recognition[disambiguation needed], and various factors including confidence, interference, and mental state. It has long been speculated that mistaken eyewitness identification plays a major role in wrongful conviction of otherwise innocent individuals. A growing body of research now supports this, and some research indicates that mistaken eyewitness identification accounts for more convictions of the innocent than all other factors combined.
...
Witnesses can be subject of memory distortions that can alter their account of events. It is of particular interest that the memory of an eyewitness can become compromised by other information, such that an individual's memory becomes biased. This can increase Eyewitnesses' sensitivity to the misinformation effect. Individuals report what they believe to have witnessed at the time the crime occurred, even though this may be the result of a fabricated false memory. These effects can be a result of post event information.


And here's a really fascinating article that shows how some very specific memories changed, ones that you might not expect to change:

www.nationalreview.com...

This isn't just some theory either. These are memories that actually changed.


edit on 19-5-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


Don't get me wrong i agree that some may not be able to trust there eyes or there memory's from there childhood but the change i have seen in the sky's is only in the space of a year and therefore is unlikely to be a false memory or bad recall from an event.My eyesight is extremely good and i have the ability to recall conversations and events perfectly and as i don't spend my time watching the goggle box i take notice of the world around me.what gets me though is people like you who spend there time trying to convince me that what i am seeing in the sky is normal when you know and i know that is a complete false statement.What i don't understand is the reason that you and others like you are here pedalling this lie.
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Uncinus
 


Don't get me wrong i agree that some may not be able to trust there eyes or there memory's from there childhood but the change i have seen in the sky's is only in the space of a year and therefore is unlikely to be a false memory or bad recall from an event.My eyesight is extremely good and i have the ability to recall conversations and events perfectly and as i don't spend my time watching the goggle box i take notice of the world around me.what gets me though is people like you who spend there time trying to convince me that what i am seeing in the sky is normal when you know and i know that is a complete false statement.What i don't understand is the reason that you and others like you are here pedalling this lie.
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)

Did the change in the skies happen after you had heard about 'chemtrails'?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


See, that was my question too. Waiting to see Uncinus reply. To point out that "chemtrail canon" maintains that the alleged *spaying* of whatever 'nefarious' fantasy-du-jour all began back in the 1990s.

So.....the possibility that someone claiming it all *started* only last year is a strong indication of cognitive disconnect confirmation bias at work.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


no i hadn't heard about chemtrail's at all until i started looking for answers as to why last summer there was no such trail's left behind planes that lasted for 4 to 8 hours.
Last summer i spent many a day in the back garden sunbathing looking up at the sky watching the planes go over and not one of those planes left a contrail that lasted more than 5 mins.
This summer ive watched a lovely bright sunny clear start to the day then come the planes criss crossing the sky's in a lattice like pattern and within an hour the sky is overcast with a misty white layer that looks nothing like clouds.
This i see day in day out and after looking into contrail science [yes i've done my research]i found one paper that gave a time frame for how long a contrail would last before it became non visible as a trail and that was 1 hour funny enough the same paper which i gave a link to in another thread has now vanished from the web!!!!
Now i'm also aware of the temp and moisture levels needed for contrail's to persist and you would think that the right conditions for this are happening everyday when last summer they didn't happen at all.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


you my friend are a waste of time and effort as i have answered this question with you many times but i will repeat it for those with a selective memory.
Although there are some here who have been observing these trail's since the 1990's in the uk are in the south [london brighton etc] where as in the area i live they have only implemented the contrail change in the last year so they have increased there operations to cover the area i live in.
After all there are some who post here from the states that claim they have no persistent contrail's where they live.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I think what we need is a comprehensive database of where and when people first noticed chemtrails.

If it matches up (same times in same places) then that would be good evidence to support the theory that there has been some changes.

If it does not (people in same place notice at very different times), then it's evidence that the theory is false.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


I don't think you can use that information in that way to prove or disprove the change after all many people are so busy with work etc that not many would look at the sky's most won't notice until some one mentions it to them so that would make unreliable as verification of when the change occurred.
There are very few people like myself who look up at the sky often enough to see the change occur at the time at which it occurred.Therefore it may be a good guide it can't be see as prof one way or the other



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


no i hadn't heard about chemtrail's at all until i started looking for answers as to why last summer there was no such trail's left behind planes that lasted for 4 to 8 hours.
Last summer i spent many a day in the back garden sunbathing looking up at the sky watching the planes go over and not one of those planes left a contrail that lasted more than 5 mins.

Do you know the difference between weather and climate? Research the distinction and you might find some answers.


Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 

This summer ive watched a lovely bright sunny clear start to the day then come the planes criss crossing the sky's in a lattice like pattern and within an hour the sky is overcast with a misty white layer that looks nothing like clouds.

Have we had our eyes checked? Contrails and clouds are made of the same thing, maybe you don't know the difference between the different types of clouds (hence why you think contrails don't look like clouds). The # pattern is caused by some air traffic flying north to south and the other traffic flying east to west. Nothing anomalous about that.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 

This i see day in day out and after looking into contrail science [yes i've done my research]i found one paper that gave a time frame for how long a contrail would last before it became non visible as a trail and that was 1 hour

If the conditions are right, a contrail can persist for as long as any other cloud. There is no limit (especially not an hour). Perhaps the paper didn't exist? Convenient how all of this 'chemtrail' evidence did exist but has somehow disappeared.



Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Now i'm also aware of the temp and moisture levels needed for contrail's to persist and you would think that the right conditions for this are happening everyday when last summer they didn't happen at all.

It seems that you are making an assumption based on ignorance of the distinction between weather and climate. How do you know what the conditions are in the atmosphere above your head?

(Hint: if contrails are forming, the temperature and humidity is conducive for contrail formation, if they aren't, you won't see contrails. The temperature on the ground can somewhat reliably show what the temperature will be X feet above the ground, this summer the conditions are good for contrail formation, last summer they weren't. Simple enough?)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


i have to say i applaud your efforts but i have looked into the science of contrail's and how they form conditions etc but it seams strange to me that where i live persistent contrail's [they fly other in the morning and an hour before sunset]can occur everyday at the allotted times and the planes that fly over during the rest of the day do not leave contrails that last more than 2 mins how reliable the climate must be to allow this to happen.
When a company funds research like the link below also gives food for thought but i'm sure you will say that it's not prof of anything then add to that when you try to look up the company named as the supplier of the substances used in the experiment and you can find no real information on them esp as they are a multibillion pound company also seams strange.
add to that that every report posted here by you o the other side of the fence there is no mention of time frame of how long a contrail can last before it is no longer visible as a plane trail.
www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 


Thanks for linking that document again, see my questions about it in the other thread.

A contrail can persist for as long as a cloud can stay in the air. It will spread out because of the wind though, it's not just going to be a distinct contrail for hours (unless there is no wind, highly unlikely).



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


that link is not to contrails which hits me as kinda strange did you look at the paper or just sidelined it like many before you?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


that link is not to contrails which hits me as kinda strange did you look at the paper or just sidelined it like many before you?

The first sentence in my post referred to the "atomizer" in the test.

The second was a response to your post before mine. Read over your own post and the reply before posting a knee jerk response.

ETA: Here is a link to my post responding to you in the other thread.
edit on 5/20/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
when you try to look up the company named as the supplier of the substances used in the experiment and you can find no real information on them esp as they are a multibillion pound company also seams strange.


They are a company that supplies chemicals. What exactly is so suspicious here? It was NanoProducts Corp, which is now part of PPG Industries:
www.ppg.com...

I think you are over-thinking this. Scientists study the weather. That's all that's going on here.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Your right my bad thats the problem with posting on two different threads i apologise i have given a possible answer to your question in the other thread



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I found a related article from 1957:

books.google.com...=onepage&q=%22skies%20were%20bluer%22&f=false



So not only is the perception that skies were bluer when were younger as old as time, it might also be inevitable. Our memories of colors will always be more vibrant than the present. That's just the way our brains work.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Our perception and memory of "very blue skies" is usually a triggered "contrast response".
Usually this happens when there is a contrast....such as several days of gray skies, followed by a blue one.
After several days of gray overcast-ness or rain, a clear blue sky becomes a memorable relief....and we memorize that day.
Those clear days tend to become the visual standard in our heads..
But when we compare all other days to that (those) clear-blue days, there-in lies the emotional trap.

It just so happens that after a rain, science tells us that it is usually the case that most of the airborne particulates have been "used" by the wet storm, and the particles were "cleansed" from the air/skies.........(as rain uses particulate matter for raindrop nuclei). Yes, the skies often look incredibly blue after a rain.
I have given 2 reasons why "skies look more blue" sometimes...
1) the contrast from previous cloudy/overcast days...
2) the fact that rain "cleanses" the air.

In either case, extremely blue skies are placed into our memory, perhaps several times a year.
But for some people, this seems to be "the standard" that all (most) days should adhere-to.....which is statistically, quite unrealistic..
edit on 28-7-2011 by EyeDontKnow because: corrections of the 3rd kind.



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


maybe its just me but A and B look exactly the same colour tho ive been known to see clearer than most. good luck with your blue sky theories



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Polgrady
reply to post by Uncinus
 


maybe its just me but A and B look exactly the same colour tho ive been known to see clearer than most. good luck with your blue sky theories




Note it's the squares, not the letters that are the same color. A looks like it's on a dark gray square, and B on a light square - but in reality they are on the exact same color square.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join