China admits to dumping chemtrails for weather modification. What do they look like??

Originally posted by Starling

OK, I got the reason for the sun-ring, (why are there ice crystals on such a sunny May day?)

Now, what about that plane making its way back and forth across the sky? Has it lost its way?

Why don't you do time lapse shots?
Or is that like asking the fox to kindly guard the chickens?!!)

Patience Starling, time lapse require time to elapse.

I think it's more likely multiple planes passing overhead in different directions, rather than one plane turing around. Do you see a "U" shaped trail at any point? Can you actually follow the plane with your eye as it turns around?

See the trails in the satellite photo over Ventura they are all parallel to the coast. Those are just regular north/south traffic (half of them going north). The trails at right angles to LA are likely Hawaii traffic.

The ice is in the sky just because of the moisture from the storm, that's all. It's always cold enough above 35,000 feet. See the forecast by altitude

www.usairnet.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b893af1ef0cd.jpg[/atsimg]

-56F at 34000 feet. Contrail form at around -40 or below. Ice crystals form when it's cold and there's a lot of moisture.

Time Lapse of todays contrails


Not vastly interesting. You don't really see any contrails form. But it's is kind of interesting to see different clouds and contrails move at different speeds.

That's about 51 minutes, down to 21 s, so 1 second is about 3 minutes.

reply to post by bsbray11


I think this forum has gotten off topic. The OP wanted to see pictures of contrails not argue about chemtrail stuff. I recently stepped outside and saw several contrails. I am figuring out how to uploaded them now.

reply to post by afw2121

The OP wanted to know what weather modification (cloud seeding) looks like.

reply to post by Phage


You know what... Doing a google search for "cloud seeding" doesn't really return any real pictures. Must not happen as much as everyone here thinks.

Originally posted by afw2121
reply to post by Phage

 

You know what... Doing a google search for "cloud seeding" doesn't really return any real pictures. Must not happen as much as everyone here thinks.

Oh it happens all the time. It's just really boring to photograph, as it looks like a small plane by a big rain cloud, burning flares or an acetone burner (like in the images below). From a distance it look like either a small plane, or nothing (as the cloud hides the plane)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a8f7a5666f61.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/41dda927fbdf.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by Uncinus


Nice pictures.

reply to post by afw2121

Here's a video (again).

Originally posted by afw2121
reply to post by Phage

 

You know what... Doing a google search for "cloud seeding" doesn't really return any real pictures. Must not happen as much as everyone here thinks.

Your google search must be different to my google search then.....

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
-therefore I am justified in concluding that they are contrails.

You forget that it isn't an either/or scenario, because I believe contrails exist too.

Never said you didn't, and it is irrelevant anyway.

Nothing at all about that automatically discludes chemtrails from also existing at the same time.

no it's not automatic - and it is covered by the bit that says that there's no evidence there is anything else that they might be.

So what is "they"? Every white trail in the sky following every white plain? That is a leap of faith no more than believing that they are being dumped.

No it's not a leap of faith it is a trail of logic that I laid out in clear points.

If I am wrong then one or more of my premises must be wrong, or the conclusion must no follow from the premises - saying hat I have made a "leap of faith" when clearly I have not is just stupid and self incriminating for yuo as evidence that you actually have no idea of logic at all!.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
-therefore I am justified in concluding that they are contrails.

You forget that it isn't an either/or scenario, because I believe contrails exist too.

Never said you didn't, and it is irrelevant anyway.

Actually it is completely relevant to your "logic." What you were arguing amounts to "I don't believe in coyotes because we already know domesticated dogs exist." Where do you account for the possibility of both?

Nothing at all about that automatically discludes chemtrails from also existing at the same time.

no it's not automatic - and it is covered by the bit that says that there's no evidence there is anything else that they might be.

So in a lack of evidence you start making assumptions that can't be proven. There is a term for this kind of fallacy but you already know it well. You're still in denial about using it, despite the fact that your argument flagrantly depends on it.

So what is "they"? Every white trail in the sky following every white plain? That is a leap of faith no more than believing that they are being dumped.

No it's not a leap of faith it is a trail of logic that I laid out in clear points.

Right, just like you'd have a "trail of logic" to assume the UK never dumped biological and chemical agents on people just because contrails exist, too, right?

It's logical only to someone who refuses to accept they are depending on known fallacies. Someone, like you.

If I am wrong then one or more of my premises must be wrong

And they are -- you are arguing from total ignorance. Not everyone has or even wants the groveling faith you have to your government officials.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

So what is "they"? Every white trail in the sky following every white plain? That is a leap of faith no more than believing that they are being dumped.

No it's not a leap of faith it is a trail of logic that I laid out in clear points.

Right, just like you'd have a "trail of logic" to assume the UK never dumped biological and chemical agents on people just because contrails exist, too, right?

huh? where did I ever say the Brits din't carry out the Porton Down experiments?

It's logical only to someone who refuses to accept they are depending on known fallacies. Someone, like you.

If I am wrong then one or more of my premises must be wrong

And they are -- you are arguing from total ignorance. Not everyone has or even wants the groveling faith you have to your government officials.

so you should be able to point to exactly which of my premises is wrong, and why, and not jsut make meaningless evaluations like "you are arguing from total ignorance".

Here it is again more or less:

1/ Long white trails look like contrails
2/ they are generated in the manner in which contrails are generated
3/ They behave in the way in which contrails behave
4/ there is nothing else known that they could be
5/ therefore it is reasonable to conclude that they are contrails.

Are you going to suggest that the Porton Down trials somehow invalidate this? Lets see:

1/ the trails at portdown do not look like contrails - the are low level, not fluffy, they are not symmetrical, even, they are "spotty"
2/ they are not generated in the manner in which contrails are generated - don't come from engines, are generated immediately behind - even beside - the a/c with no gap
3/ they do not behave like contrails - it difuses quickly and spreads out to a blur rather than remainign sharp edged, and it does not narrow as it fades - it fades evenly across it's entire width
4/ they are not known to be happening now from airliners flying at 30,000 feet, indeed they are not known to have happened since the 1960's
5/ therefore they do not invalidate my conclusion.

Here's the video from YT:

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by bsbray11
Right, just like you'd have a "trail of logic" to assume the UK never dumped biological and chemical agents on people just because contrails exist, too, right?

huh? where did I ever say the Brits din't carry out the Porton Down experiments?

But were those chemicals and biological agents all contrails, too? Contrails exist, so how could those chemicals also be dumped?

so you should be able to point to exactly which of my premises is wrong, and why, and not jsut make meaningless evaluations like "you are arguing from total ignorance".

The fact that you are making a logical fallacy known as "argument from ignorance" is not meaningless. It is what you are specifically getting wrong.

Here it is again more or less:

1/ Long white trails look like contrails
2/ they are generated in the manner in which contrails are generated
3/ They behave in the way in which contrails behave
4/ there is nothing else known that they could be
5/ therefore it is reasonable to conclude that they are contrails.

Again, this is not an either/or problem.

"Domesticated dogs exist, they look like coyotes, they smell and behave like coyotes, therefore coyotes don't exist."

That might as well be your next argument.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Right, just like you'd have a "trail of logic" to assume the UK never dumped biological and chemical agents on people just because contrails exist, too, right?

huh? where did I ever say the Brits didn't carry out the Porton Down experiments?

But were those chemicals and biological agents all contrails, too? Contrails exist, so how could those chemicals also be dumped?

Huh?? they were "dumped" because they were dumped - the existence of contrails doesn't mean they were not dumped - there is clear evidence they were dumped, and clear evidence they don't resemble contrails at all - you could at least pretend to be sensible - if not actually logical

so you should be able to point to exactly which of my premises is wrong, and why, and not jsut make meaningless evaluations like "you are arguing from total ignorance".

The fact that you are making a logical fallacy known as "argument from ignorance" is not meaningless. It is what you are specifically getting wrong.

Again-- that simply makes no sense - I am not making an argument from ignorance - I am not saying "you can't prove something doesn't exist therefore it does exist " - that is your trick - you are really getting weird now

Here it is again more or less:

1/ Long white trails look like contrails
2/ they are generated in the manner in which contrails are generated
3/ They behave in the way in which contrails behave
4/ there is nothing else known that they could be
5/ therefore it is reasonable to conclude that they are contrails.

Again, this is not an either/or problem.

"Domesticated dogs exist, they look like coyotes, they smell and behave like coyotes, therefore coyotes don't exist."

Irrelevant - there is clear evidence that coyotes exist & we know that domestic dogs are not coyotes - if you are going to argue by analogy at least get the basic parameters right.

That might as well be your next argument.

Only if I get as silly as you, and I'm happy to say I have no need to - you used to at least make some sense - even when you were being illogical - this post is just nonsensical.

Originally posted by afw2121
reply to post by Phage

 

You know what... Doing a google search for "cloud seeding" doesn't really return any real pictures. Must not happen as much as everyone here thinks.

It happens a lot, but it's not the sort of thing that gets photographed - especially since it's not easy to take a picture of a plane flying through or over moisture-bearing clouds (which it needs to do in order to seed it). Obviously you'd see nothing from the ground because the cloud would be in the way. I suppose you could charter another aircraft to fly alongside the cloud seeder in order to get photos. But why bother? A cloud seeder looks much like a crop duster - but instead of the spray going onto the ground it merges in with the cloud where (in theory) the microscopic particles form raindrop nuclei.

The Chinese traditionally use rockets. But there aren't pictures of them actually operating for the same reason (the rocket will obviously have disappeared into the clouds before it explodes to disperse the seeding material).

Originally posted by bsbray11
Again, this is not an either/or problem.

"Domesticated dogs exist, they look like coyotes, they smell and behave like coyotes, therefore coyotes don't exist."

That might as well be your next argument.

post a picture of either a coyote or a domestic dog and ask me to tell you if it is a coyote or a dog and I will tell you which it is and offer solid evidence to support my claim.

See how it works?

ok, listen chemtrailers, im sorry you are so far behind the times, but chemtrails are no longer dispersed by jets. planes cannot reach the higher levels of the upper atmosphere where the new geneeration of chemtrails are being dispersed.

chinese weather manipulation is a completely different and entirely unconnected subject.

Originally posted by SirCoxone
post a picture of either a coyote or a domestic dog and ask me to tell you if it is a coyote or a dog and I will tell you which it is and offer solid evidence to support my claim.

See how it works?

So how would you tell a chemtrail apart from a normal contrail?

Give me specifics as to how you would be able to tell one white trail left by a plane, apart from another white trail left by a plane that has other chemicals in it.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by SirCoxone
post a picture of either a coyote or a domestic dog and ask me to tell you if it is a coyote or a dog and I will tell you which it is and offer solid evidence to support my claim.

See how it works?

So how would you tell a chemtrail apart from a normal contrail?

Give me specifics as to how you would be able to tell one white trail left by a plane, apart from another white trail left by a plane that has other chemicals in it.

Well let's see:
- Uncinus told you how you'd differentiate fuel dumps - www.abovetopsecret.com...
- I told you how you'd differentiate salt or CO2 used for cloud seeding, www.abovetopsecret.com...
- silver iodide is barely visible anyway and so is easy to differentiate,
- airshow smoke trails & simlar "visibility" trails might be a problem - I might have trouble differntiating them, especially if htey are t high altitude...although if that is the case they often end with a bang!
- rocket exhausts are generally vertical & while alot of ppl have problems with perspective that's not really an excuse for getting them wrong,
- Ag sprayers are also pretty obviously different from contrails because of their shape and inevitable lack of persistence.
- water bombers also don't really look much like contrails

Are there any I missed??

Edits: going through & adding links to the posts where identifications were madegoing through & adding links to the posts where identifications were made for you

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Are there any I missed??

Yeah, you missed everything that the US military or other groups are dumping covertly.

The stuff that you don't believe happens, because otherwise you would surely know about it by now?