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.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by nuttin4U
Contrails don't *make* the rain.
The formation of contrails is a sign OF the inbound weather, and rains. Upper air cirrus very usually precede a front, which brings rain and weather changes.
The airplanes fly in the air, contrails form BECAUSE the weather is about to change..they DON'T change it!!
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
When did spraying chemicals in the air and leaving visible chemical trails stop counting as a chem trail if it isnt over 28 000 feet, and in answer to phages question
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
... but after people in this thread have made comments that it doesn't and that the technology to spray aerosols from planes doesn't exist it was fitting to use the thread to show that it does.
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
My entire point this entire time was to show that government's, corporation's and military are dumping chemical's in the air for a lot of purposes and yes these chemicals are harmful according to the msds.
from the ContrailScience website...
IF you want to be a scaremonger, then perhaps take a look at caffeine vs. Silver Iodine:
www.sciencelab.com...
www.sciencelab.com...
Silver Iodine has an oral LD50 of 2820 mg/kg, caffeine has one of 192. That means caffeine is FIFTEEN TIMES more toxic than silver iodine. So why no outcry over its use in drinks?
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
The beginning of the chemtrail debate wasn't whether it was carried out on behalf of evil people bent on population reduction but rather whether dumping chemicals in the air was harmful and should be stopped.
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
Now a chemtrail classification has to meet a height requirement, has to be carried out by certain individuals and not other's. It's also these requirement's that stop people from understanding that yes there are some chemicals being dropped out of planes and yes they are not healthy to breathe.
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by adeclerk
Have Government ever sprayed dangerous chemicals deliberately on unsuspecting civilians??
The answer is a resounding 'YES'...
The only question is, are they still doing it ??
We know they have the capability..
We know they don't care about our well being..
We know there's enough black ops funds to cover it..
Originally posted by Jinglelord
That said I think it is important in the process of debunking to at least acknowledge that there is likely some impact from a normal contrail. To deny new clouds have an impact is counter intuitive and would require quite a bit of research to show definitively that they don't.
Vapour trails or contrails, by affecting the Earth's radiation balance, act as a radiative forcing. Studies have found that vapour trails or contrails trap outgoing longwave radiation emitted by the Earth and atmosphere (positive radiative forcing) at a greater rate than they reflect incoming solar radiation (negative radiative forcing). Therefore, the overall net effect of contrails is positive, i.e. a warming.[5] However, the effect varies daily and annually, and overall the magnitude of the forcing is not well known: globally (for 1992 air traffic conditions), values range from 3.5 mW/m2 to 17 mW/m2. Other studies have determined that night flights are mostly responsible for the warming effect: while accounting for only 25% of daily air traffic, they contribute 60 to 80% of contrail radiative forcing. Similarly, winter flights account for only 22% of annual air traffic, but contribute half of the annual mean radiative forcing.
The effect IS miniscule. And, still being debated.
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by bhornbuckle75
Did I mention any scale in my post??
I'm just pointing out that they have done this in the past..
I didn't say there was 3000 planes up there spraying now..
Please read my post properly...
Originally posted by Jinglelord
reply to post by Uncinus
Well if it was commonly acknowledged by all debunkers I would imagine Weedwhacker wouldn't have said:
The effect IS miniscule. And, still being debated.
The important part being the last of that sentence. When you say something is being debated it infers that you don't agree with it or that there is enough evidence in your opinion to show it incorrect. Last I checked he is the loudest and most ardent Chemtrail debunker on ATS. Where there is a Chemtrail thread there is the Whacker to knock it down.
Either way I do not think it is commonly accepted and is an important part of the myth which should be brought up as in my opinion this is where a conspiracy would exist if one really did...
6. Is there a large amount of silver iodide, or other material, in the rainfall that reaches the ground from seeded clouds?
Actually, the amounts of silver detected from rainwater samples collected in Texas have been quite small. The typical concentration of silver in rainwater, or snowfall, from a seeded cloud is less than 0.1 micrograms per liter (one part in 10 billion). That concentration is well below the acceptable concentration of 50 micrograms per liter as established by the U. S. Public Health Service.....
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by firepilot
Are planes being used to deliver the chemical agent silver iodide into the atmosphere or not ? ANSWER THE QUESTIONedit on 31-5-2011 by DrunkNinja because: (no reason given)