It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Are these chemtrials or contrails?

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 03:34 PM

Originally posted by HybridEB
Sorry, it just doesn't look natural to me.

Well of course it is not "natural," it is a contrail produced by man made activities (i.e. a jet engine in extremly cold air).

Why won't you accept the fact that the upper atmosphere is not homogeneus?

The temperatures, relative humidity and even the air pressure can vary drasitly from point to point. In many cases these differences have distinct boundries.

One question for you:

Are you familiar with the concept of supersaturation?

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:31 PM
I’m not stupid dude; I meant that when a trail stops abruptly, it isn't caused by anything natural. I didn't say that the trail itself is unnatural.

There is a difference between the atmosphere not being homogeneous and there being a drastic temperature difference in such a short space. The distinct boundaries you talk about are not abrupt but gradual. Plus, responding to an earlier post, the size of clouds doesn't depend on the air around them but the amount of water vapor in them.

No I am not familiar with the concept of super saturation but I will gladly look into it if you provide me with the necessary links.


posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 05:38 PM
who said jets were at 30,000'. If you cannot tell by your eye the difference between jet types and sizes and apply that to distance ( which should be done automatically ) then typing all bi-noculars are focus infinity at a given range because they are all 7x 35mm and all cost $19.99 at wal-mart your right I can't see anything because these binoculars were made in China 4-months ago hhhhmmmmmmmmmm. Anyway Big difference between a KC-135 flying at 15,000' and a Fed-Ex flying at 28,000' both of which you can make out without magnification. The 135's are an alpine white color or Gray. And what a neat flight patteren, looks like they are mowing the sky with back and forth passes. A couple usually fly in a team and cut the sky by flying 5 minutes in one direction and then turning around and doing likewise. Then the sunny skies quickly turn into a mix of stinging eyes and short rainbows, the sort you see when oil is floating on water. Then many times a big ol' purty Sunbow will make it's way through the soup to astound and amaze your apathetic friends.

posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 07:47 PM
Let's say both of these airplanes were overhead, and the same apparent size in comparison to each other, I bet you would think that they were at the same altitude wouldn't you?

Given the size difference, they would not be, but when both planes are more than a mile away, with nothing to provide a size reference to, you wouldn't really be able to tell now would you?

How about these two?

or maybe these two?

or to the extreme these two. At a couple of miles overhead, the human eye would not be able to make the distinction as to which one is closer.

[edit on 30-1-2005 by HowardRoark]

posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 07:27 PM
For what it is worth..
I have been watching this phenomenon in our area for over 18 months. On numerous occasions ( invariably the day before a heavy rain ) many planes criss-cross the skies, sometimes for as long as 10 hours, spewing chemtrails which quickly mutate into a sky covering morass. You can see other planes at the same height creating "real contrails" which blows that theory all to hell. Last Saturday was a good example. I logged 64 flights of chemtrails in 9 hours ( there were many more, but I couldn't watch the whole time and the chemtrails quickly mutate into nasty looking clouds ) and noted their place in the sky and direction. If tomorrow is a clear day, I will look for planes in the same place at the same time. Most of the time the flights are not there. Something is going on. Calling all of them normal contrails, from my perspective, is just not the answer.


posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 08:02 PM

Originally posted by 25thID
You can see other planes at the same height creating "real contrails" which blows that theory all to hell. Larry

Well, Larry, since we've already established that the human eye is incapable of distinguishing the difference between a plane flying at 20,000 feet and one flying at 30,000 feet, just how were you able to determine that the planes were flying at the same altitude?

posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 01:52 PM
quite easily ..with a pair of binoculars..the planes are the same size.....


posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:30 PM
Well, Duh, what if the two planes are different sizes?

both planes in the above picture look about the same size, but are they?

How about these two?

Besides all of that, even if you had 10X binoculars, the difference in the arc length (and the apparent size) of two identical planes, one 25,000 feet and the other 30,000 feet away from you would be too small to accurately determine independently from each other. In other words, although they may appear to be the same size, they probably aren't the exact same size, and at that distance, even a miniscule difference between the two apparent sizes can mean a huge differences between altitudes.

Why don't you subscribe to Flight Explorer for a month? It only costs around $10 and you can get the exact altitude, and all of the other information on the plane.

[edit on 5-3-2005 by HowardRoark]

posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 06:38 PM
One more time..I have a good pair of binoculars...not 10X.. do you realize the difference between 30,000 feet and 40,000 feet is 2 miles ? think about it. I have been looking at the skies for over 45 years. please do not insult my intelligence.


posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:48 PM
What kind of binoculars do you have?

What power and objective size?

Are they roof prism or poro prism?

Who made them?

If your binoculars are that good, then can you identify the planes?

Can you tell what airlines they are from?

[edit on 5-3-2005 by HowardRoark]

posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 04:09 PM
just got these yesterday.... I can see enough. Look forward to another spraying barrage..LOL

New Century ® 12-40X70 High Power Zoom Binoculars

Brings objects up to 40 times closer than the naked eye!!

New Century's ® HP 12-40X70 combines all the most desired and advanced features into one binocular at a very modest price. It presents the perfect symmetry between value and performance seen only in the very top segment of optics world.

New Century ® HP12-40X70 are housed in a beautiful, lightweight composite body. Durable rubber armored exterior allows it to be held comfortably for steady viewing. Ruggedly constructed in an advanced roof prism design and with sophisticated multicoated lenses, that offer up a bright crisp view. New Century ® HP delivers true subject resolution and maximum light transmission. Its Huge 70mm objective lenses offer great dawn to dusk viewing capability.

Binoculars offer up a power range from 12x magnification to 40X. Sufficient eye relief accommodates eyeglass/sunglass wearers comfortably and allows for preferred individual adjustments with fast twist-up eyecup configuration.

The overall meticulous design, the attention to detail and the thorough craftsmanship are obvious to the most critical observer.


Retail $229.95

just as I suspected... very few of the airplanes that showed up last Saturday were here yesterday. None of this activity is easily explained with all the meterological data presented here. Something is going on. Not sure what. Since I can't convince those who don't have an open mind on the subject, will drop it for now.


posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 11:33 AM
That is a rather obscure brand of binocular. The closest info I could find on it was this:

Anyway. Do you use a tripod with it? Doesn’t the image jump around on you at maximum zoom?

I hope you aren’t going to abandon this thread that easily. I have an open mind to any logically presented data.

My problem is, that you haven’t really presented any data. You claim that you observe airplanes at the same altitude, some are making trails, the others are not.

I don’t doubt hat when seen through a zoom binocular, the two planes may look to be about the same distance away

However, I do not think that that method is that accurate, since the slightest twitch on the zoom lever will change the apparent size of the image, and at 40x, or even at 10x, a handheld binocular will shake too much to be able to really observe the airplanes properly.

You need a better system to determine the altitude of the planes. A laser rangefinder is out. (Most don’t really have the range anyway
) Old military surplus optical rangefinders are out there, but they are hard to find and can get rather expensive.

I still say your best bet is to purchase a one month subscription to Flight Explorer and use it to identify the planes that you see.

posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 05:53 PM
I could die a happy person if I never saw another "chem"trail thread again.

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 09:27 AM
Last comment on this. If I cannot tell one plane is 2 miles away from another them I am blind. So many questions and so much skepticism. Look at the record of this government in the treatment of its citizens over time. I start from the other side and assume that someting stinks when I see it....I worked for the federal government for 32 years. 'Nuf sed !!!

Our benevolent "government" has consistently and callously used its citizens and servicemen and women as guinea pigs ( see below ), and then denied that they did it and denied benefits to them until forced to by court order.

Ask much is still secret ?????

Any one that breathes the air now.....

( chemtrails ...

drinks the water ......

( flouride ... )

and uses artificial sweetners .......

( aspartame ... )

is participating in the continuous chemical poisoning of the environment and our minds...


Atomic Veterans ********

MK Ultra ***************

US Army '___' experiments ******

biowar experiments *****

CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales reports that during the 1960s, the Pentagon conducted more than 100 secret biological warfare tests at sea.

Gulf war 1 biowar vaccine connection *******

Atomic Poison gas experiments ********

1949 – 1968 simulant organism released off coast of San Francisco and in New York City subway

Jail time, not payoffs -- that's the way to deal with 30 years of secret, gruesome government medical experiments, the Libertarian Party said today.

A Congressional subcommittee hearing in Washington, DC on September 28, 1994 revealed that up to 500,000 Americans were endangered by secret defense-related tests between 1940 and 1974 -- including covert experiments with radioactive materials, mustard gas, '___', and biological agents. For example, between 1949 and 1969, the Army released radioactive compounds in 239 cities to study the effects, according to General Accounting Office testimony the hearings

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 11:01 AM
25th ID, if you have 40 X binoculars you won't be able to get a good look at the aircraft unless the binocs are on a tripod. Just as the binoculars magnify the object by forty times, the also magnify any hand trembling forty times as well.

Now I can't tell a 737-800 from a 757 or even a 777 ER at ten thousand feet, and I have worked for Boeing for fifteen years. You can't do it, because the planes look too much alike.

And you also can't do it based on depth perception, because, assuming that you're a human being with two eyes approximately 75 mm apart, your brain can't perceive depth (absent any cues, which you don't have in the sky) any further away than about 750 feet.

That is why, in World War II, the Navy used rangefinders which were like binoculars with the objective lenses about 4 feet apart.

And I doubt if your binoculars have an inter-aperture separation of more than about six inches.

So you're simply not able to determine the distance of two aircraft, no matter how badly you want to.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by Off_The_Street]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 11:28 AM
Hybrid EB says:

"I’m not stupid dude; I meant that when a trail stops abruptly, it isn't caused by anything natural. I didn't say that the trail itself is unnatural."

Hybrid, have you ever seen an abrupt stop to a cloud -- in other words, have you ever seen a cloud with sharply-defined edges?

I have, too; and so has everyone else here.

There is a difference between the atmosphere not being homogeneous and there being a drastic temperature difference in such a short space. The distinct boundaries you talk about are not abrupt but gradual.

See comment above. From 30,000 feet, though, they look pretty abrupt.

And remember, you don't have to have a drastic shift in temperature or humidity in order for there to be persistent contrails. If the temperature is below minus 40 deg and the relative humidity is 100% (saturated), the contrails will persist. If either of those two conditions are not met, then the contrail will dissipate.

Now you're probably aware that relative humidity is not determined solely by the percentage of water vapor in a given volume of air; it is the percentage of water vapor in a given volume of air at a certain temperature. The colder it is, the less water vapor you need before the air becomes saturated.

Think of it this way:

Pour some cold water into a cup and add a teaspoon of sugar. Stir it up until it dissolves. then add another teaspoon of water and another, stirring well. Sooner or later, you will reach a point where, no matter how much you stir, you will not be able to dissolve the suger. In other words, the sugar solution is saturated.

Now pop that puppy in the microwave and nuke it for about a minute and a half. take it out and stir again.

Voila! the sugar has dissolved!

You can get more of a solute (whether water vapor or sugar) in a solvent (whether a cup of water or a volume of air) if the solvent is hotter!

Therefore, if the temperature rises by just a couple of degrees (from, say, minus 41 deg to minus 38 deg) then, even if the relative humidity was 100%, that little bit of temperature rise will ensure that it is no longer 100%.

And that tiny temperature/humidity change is all you need to exceed the envelope for persistent contrails

"Plus, responding to an earlier post, the size of clouds doesn't depend on the air around them but the amount of water vapor in them."

It also depends on the temperature, as I discussed above.

"No I am not familiar with the concept of super saturation but I will gladly look into it if you provide me with the necessary links."

Supersaturation is when the relative humidity is greater than 100%.

Now this may seem impossible, since you'd think that a theoretical maximum can't be exceeded, but it's not.

Remember that cup of hot water we took out of the microwave that had too much sugar to dissolve at low temperature but dissolved at high temperature? Well, you might want to try this yourself, for grins.

As the hot water cools, there's now too much sugar in it to stay dissolved, so the sugar crystals appear (or they "precipitate out") on the sides and the bottom of the cup. And more and more sugar crystals will precipitate out until you have the 'saturated' amount of sugar water at whatever the new (room) temperature is.

But if you very carefully let the water cool slowly without shaking up the water or adding any impurities, the sugar crystals won't precipitate out. the cooler water is now supersaturated.

Now, drop about ten grains of sugar into the supersaturated cooled solution. Within about a minute, the dissolved sugar molecules will grab on to the new additions and you will have a big crystal appear as if by magic.

And that is why sometimes contrails spread out and cover the sky with cirrus clouds. If portions of the atmosphere are supersaturated and the cold air is holding more moisture than it "should", the addition of the ice crystals from the aircraft engines, along with the turbulence, acts just like the grains of sugar you dropped into the supersaturated cup of sugar water, and ends up "seeding" all the water vapor.

And there's your new cirrus cloud (which, of course, like all cirrus clouds, is just ice crystals).

[edit on 8-3-2005 by Off_The_Street]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 08:26 PM
Wow an entire post dedicated to disproving what I said. Okay, I'm not that good at wording my ideas when it comes to science so instead I'll let you read a real congressional bill that admits to the existence of Chemtrails.

Space Preservation Act of 2001


posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 08:36 PM
If you're referring to the "(III) by expelling chemical or biological agents in the vicinity of a person." that is in the context of defining what a weapon is...
mace falls into this catagory...

and "(ii) chemtrails;" dates back to Hitler.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by apc]

posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 08:50 PM
Please use the terms in context as they are used in the document.

"The terms `weapon' and `weapons system' mean a device capable of any of the following"


(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;

The term "exotic weapons system" combined with every example listed does not appear to be that old.


posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 09:04 PM
Very well, then it resides alongside other nonexistant weapons systems. Im not saying these weapons haven't been invented, they have, but they aren't in use in our skies nor does a practical application exist at this time.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in