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.


Extreme Chemtrail-day in Holland! Is anyone else seeing this?

page: 17
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:12 PM
ive yet to see any video footage or still pictures of "persistent spreading contrails" pre-dating the 1990's

surely atmospheric conditions were the same then as they are now? surely heat from engine exhaust is the same heat as was back then?

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:18 PM
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker

Then look in the other thread currently jostling for top spot on the board with this one, there are photos in there from 1956, if you follow the link back to the photo source you will find lots more, going back to at least 1940.

They are more common now only because there are more aircraft and these aircraft are powered by much bigger engines.
edit on 15-10-2011 by waynos because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:32 PM
Same thing in belgium...
Friday in the morning i looked up and sky was unusually blue after days with only clouds
Later afternoon I saw these trails everywhere but barely any planes.I told my friend and he looked up and found it weird too

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:36 PM
reply to post by UnrelentingLurker

ive yet to see ..... "persistent spreading contrails" pre-dating the 1990's

You haven't looked hard enough.

surely atmospheric conditions were the same then as they are now?

Yes, of course.

surely heat from engine exhaust is the same heat as was back then?

Yes, of course. (**)

(**) There remains a difference, though, when talking about jet-power. Earliest jet engines were called Turbo-Jets, where the majority of the thrust they produce is derived from the reaction of the gases escaping, and pushing the engine the other direction. The resulting behavior of the gases is different, they tended to spread out more diffusely, and thus the contrail would sublimate more readily.

Today, the vast majority (and FAR more airplanes also) of engines are High-Bypass Turbo-Fans. The majority of the thrust component from these engine is produced by the huge fan (called the 'N1' fan) in front. The first stage, is another term....its fan blades are far larger diameter than the central core of the engine. The portion of the fan diameter outside the core diameter "grabs" the air, just like a propeller, and produces about 80% to 85% of the forward thrust. The inner portion, near the central hub, are the "fist stage" of the compressor seciton, as they help channel the air to the interior of the engine, for combustion.

The large quantity of ambient air that is by-passing the central core is thus enveloping the hot exhaust gases. The dynamics of the motion of that air is different too. But, it all "buffers" the hotter air, and leads to the formation of more prevalent contrails, than from a straight Turbo-Jet.

Keep in mind, the big piston-engined bombers of WW 2 made a similar effect....those propellers were much larger diameter then the engines in the center....the engines produced hot exhaust that was shrouded by the propeller's air...very similar to today.

Fighters, too...big propeller, engine and hot exhaust in center:

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:53 PM

Originally posted by PrecogPsychicSensitive

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by PrecogPsychicSensitive

ANYONE with a brain in their head can see the difference between a genuine contrail and chemtrail,

And what is it?

obviously the difference is contrails disappear quickly, the do not hang in the air for up to 4 hours or more and smear the sky like butter on bread kilometres wide.. and when combined together become a huge white opaque blanket in blue sky.

And what is the evidence to say that is true?

'cos there's a great deal of scientific evidence says it's utter rubbish - that contrails can last for many hours - 17 has been recorded...and that they do spread out to cover the sky - the first instance I know of anyone saying as much was a French Recce pilot from 1940 -

Antoine Saint-Exupery in "Flight to Arras"

The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud over the countryside.

This is taken from here, but "Flight to Arras" is still available on Amazon in a volume with a couple of other works by the same author.

More eyewitness accounts from WW2

Analysis of contrail persistence vs atmospheric conditions - a 600kb PDF

The contrail observations with the highest average RHImax conditions occurred when persistent spreading contrails were present.

And your evidence is what? Some dis-info agent saying so because it helps him sell anti-chemtrail cream??

Usually I see them working around the edges of a large cloud system. Almost like it is being herded..

Yep - those clouds are herding the contrails alright - that would be because the conditions are just right for contrails in front of them.

commercial planes dont usually fly checker patterns over our skies now do they?
This is obvious if you live in the country where there is NO REASON or explanation for commercial planes to fly in these patterns.

you get planes flying north/south, and others flying east-west and you get a pattern.

Garbage... Ive seen enough of these chemtrail checker patterns to know this is no "coincidence".

Of course it is not a coincidence - it is aircraft flights in 2 different directions....

BS... where I live I KNOW which way the commercial planes fly.. so when the spraying planes come out to play, I know immediately what they are from the trails they leave and the pattern they do it in.. nice try.

Really - and so you say commercial airliners never fly in paths that cross each other??

So how do they get from, say, Paris to Oslo and Frankfurt to London without the paths crossing?? That seems to me like a perfectly valid reason to have crossing flight paths.

IF you can spot an identifying airline color on any of these planes I'll eat my hat, cause I can spot a qantas jet with its red tail at maximum altitude. And they sure dont leave chemtrails..

You conveniently left out my saying they leave contrails... I did not deny that.. when they do leave contrails they disappear as I stated.. but typical of the Ghoul style, you take bits and pieces of a post to make it fit your agenda.

You are right - I apologise.

So here's one with a QANTAS jet clearly spraying a "chemtrail"

It took all of 10 seconds to prove your claim untrue (thus showing you do not bother to actually check what you claim), and somehow it is all my fault.

And this lady in New Zealand can identify chemtrail planes using software - perhaps you should update??

I will never be convinced otherwise by you chemtrail deniers..

Of course not - you are not interested in facts, science, credible and verifiable evidence - you have your irrational belief & I'm not here to try to convert you.

But if I help prevent some other person from falling for this hoax that'll be good.

whoever or whatever you lot are.

I am an aircraft mechanic, quality assurance engineer, and aviation safety analyst - and someone who believes in needing real evidence to establish a claim.

You, OTOH, have been had.

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 07:14 PM
They are trying to block out the sun because the Draconian mother ship is approaching from behind the sun! LOL I honestly don't even care about this anymore because we aren't going to be able to them by posting pictures on websites! Yea! GO GO KEYBOARD WARRIORS! (pathetic)

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 07:36 PM
I didn't see any chemtrails in Holland, nothing out of the ordinairy at all. The chemtrails you refer to are not chemtrails but contrails. Planes are not equipped with spraying devices as far as I know, they are designed for transport.
edit on 15-10-2011 by -Thom- because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 07:57 PM
Hello CerdoFuegom, the OP. First of all please accept all my apologies, cause as a Commercial Pilot in Europe, i could had been one of those "nasty evil" pilots that pulverized your beautiful sky overhead your house 2 days ago by afternoon/evening...However i can swear to you my friend, that i DID NOT activate any "spray or chemical hidden button" on my beloved cockpit. Not me nor my first officer too!
I really dont want now to give you some meteo lessons, others made it, but with all respect, if you allow me, amongst many sites, here is one of my faves, to see the Type, airline, registration, origin, destiny, speed, altitude, heading, etc, of all those so "maquiavelic" naughty-naughty secret NWO planes:

Cheers...and stay always on the brighter side of life

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 08:31 PM
On the 14th, 2 days ago, I noticed the same as TS, but even more extreme than seen in the pictures in the OP.
My dad works @ Air France/KLM, which is the airport in Amsterdam, and I discussed this with him.

He stated that indeed cold air had to do with the majority of trails visible, however he went on to say that he had never in his life seen this many!

So I spend the day, observing the 'contrails', I noticed you could see some patterns, but one can argue with that, by saying it is due to identical arrival/departure (since I live near the airport). Anyway, the amount of trails had me baffled throughout the day, I had a hard time keeping my eyes on the road when driving..
Later in the afternoon, I pulled over to have a closer look, I had my sunglasses on, and it was that very moment that I saw a difference in some trails.. Some were more grey-ish than the majority! The structure of these trails were different as well! I'm talking about ~15% of all the trails visible at that moment.. Too bad I didn't have my camera with me..!

As a conclusion I would like to say, when these are indeed regular contrails, I don't approve of them either. I despise the blurry sky they produce (especially when it was supposed to be a clear sky), and of course the environmental consequences.

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 08:45 PM
reply to post by Uncinus

Thank you for the explanation of how planes flying at the same altitude can appear to be at different altitudes if they are viewed from straight up or on/near the horizon. If I understood you correctly?

Now, why do we get the cross hatch view near the horizon? Is it because of the weather that we are seeing the contrails of more planes?

Thank you,

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 11:55 PM
reply to post by Amsterdam saying it is due to identical arrival/departure (since I live near the airport)

Good to have the input from your Dad, in the airline business...but:

Need to clarify, again, that arrivals and departures to an airport you live nearby are not going to make contrails. They are too low, and the temperatures of the air too warm.

Check out this link for a PDF of example High Altitude aeronautical navigation chart for NL:

Take time to learn how to scroll, zoom, etc on that chart ( It's the Upper Enroute for the Netherlands, called an "ATS" chart

I'm sure you can locate Amsterdam, and Schiphol Airport locations, by referring to it. For others, find the VOR that has the three-letter identifier 'PAM'. It is in the vicinity.

Now, look at all those airways, those are the many possible routes, besides the fact that airplanes can also be radar-vectored at the will of Air Traffic Control, as needed.

Say, for instance, a flight that departed from inside Germany, and is heading across the North Atlantic. It will be flight-planned to enter the London airspace (London FIR) at one of those black triangles (called intersections, also waypoints) you see to the West, where "Amsterdam FIR" boundary ends.

Sometimes flights will be given a more direct routing, via a radar vector, than originally flight-planned through the airspace. Like, instead of making a dogleg by flying directly overhead the SPY VOR, it will be given a "direct" routing (nowadays, you just type the waypoint into the computer, and it re-calculates the course to fly). Thus, the "patterns" of the contrails may not match exactly the printed Airways.

But, that shows how flights flying over Amsterdam can be on many different courses...depends on their departure/destination points.

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 07:29 AM
Yes its true
I work with the people that spray these chemtrails and the reason is so people like you will write hysterical rubbish like this on sites like this ^^

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by Sweevo


I work with the people that spray these chemtrails...

Well, if in fact what you wrote there is true, and you're not just being facetious or having a go........

.......Then, there are a great deal of ATS members here who would absolutely love it if you would post up some information about it. Perhaps begin your own thread, provide the evidence.

I see you may be located in the UK? (If you refer to the same Edinburgh I'm thinking of). Is that then a base of operations for this "chemtrail" spraying?? On the shores of the North Sea, at the Firth of Forth??

Enquiring minds are aching to learn.

edit on Sun 16 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 01:08 PM

Originally posted by Mahree
reply to post by Uncinus

Thank you for the explanation of how planes flying at the same altitude can appear to be at different altitudes if they are viewed from straight up or on/near the horizon. If I understood you correctly?

Yes. Consider this image of two light poles.

If you ignore the pole, and just look at the light on top of it, the closer light is "higher" in the sky than the light that further away. But of course they are at the same height.

Now, why do we get the cross hatch view near the horizon? Is it because of the weather that we are seeing the contrails of more planes?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but probably to do with more planes being visible within a given patch of sky lower to the horizon, and the "pattern" being more apparent, as it seems smaller.

Consider standing on a freeway bridge. Look straight down at the traffic. You can see a few cars. Now look further away, towards the horizon, you can see hundreds of cars. It's a bit like that, but upside down, without the freeway, and 6-10 miles overhead, and rather less traffic.

edit on 16-10-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 02:31 PM
reply to post by Uncinus

Thank you for your help. I believe that I do understand this all better now and can even understand more of the official explanations using your examples.


posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 03:55 PM
What an amazingly informational thread. All of the "chemtrailers" should be thanking the "contrailers" for supplying all of this experience and knowledge regardless if they hate them =). Its obvious it has fallen on deaf ears for the most part but wow what a read. I have never really been on one side of the fence or the other because I just didn't know and hadn't done the research. I wouldn't have doubted it but didn't really believe it either I guess you could say.

I have made a decision though. The research and knowledge provided by the "contrailers" was overwhelming and hard to ignore. To be honest I didn't see a single thing offered as explanation from the "chemtrailers" other than at best circumstantial and at worst really bad guestimation. So "contrailers" it was a mission accomplished, you might not have convinced any believers but you have definately persuaded me. Thanks for taking the time to lay all of this out guys, It really was very beneficial for our community as a whole.

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 04:29 PM
reply to post by Cerdofuego

Please take a look at these two short video clips. The evidence presented is compelling!

The first one is less than three minutes long and says it all.Consider the fact that Ted Gunderson puts his face and name on the screen - to do that you must be sincere - you cannot debunk a person who is putting themself out there for the world to see as well as hear. To debunk him you could take him to court but he would still just tell the truth.

Former FBI Chief Ted Gunderson Says Chemtrail Death Dumps Must Be Stopped by aircraporg - youtube

Second clip is under ten minutes and also presents compelling evidence.

Ex Government Employee talks about CHEMTRAILS part 1 by COUNTCARDULAR - youtube

I know what is going on and am not trying to convince anyone just wanting to share some very strong evidence.

Much Peace...

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by Amanda5

Former FBI Chief Ted Gunderson Says Chemtrail Death Dumps Must Be Stopped by aircraporg - youtube

Ted Gunderson's claims have been shown to be without merit. You may search here on ATS for relevant threads.

Possibly a post made here in this thread explaining as well....

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 04:39 PM
reply to post by Amanda5

"Ex Government Employee talks about CHEMTRAILS part 1" is an old "video" (really, was a radio interview, and people add montage images to make a "video" of it).

Problem is, of course...none of it is true.

"Project Cloverleaf" is fake, made-up. In fact, there is strong evidence that people like Cliff Carnicorn, or Will Thomas, or some of their minions, might be responsible for planting and spread these lies, in furtherance of the hoax and myth.

This also involved faked "letters" from an alleged airline mechanic, a story about an imaginary "chem"trail pilot who was drunk in a bar, and spilling the beans, and another about some fictional airline executive who is supposed to have been "in on" the fake *Project Cloverleaf*, and due to a surge of conscience, decided to "tell all".

All bogus, concocted and really done in a very amateurish fashion.

posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 05:04 PM
reply to post by ProudBird

The video I watched is of Ted Gunderson speaking - filmed while he stood still for the camera.

I guess someone needs to take him to court and sue him for libel and/or slander - that would sort out the information from the disinformation.

Thanks for the tip about researching here on above top secret but I prefer to research widely. I have found in life that people who are comfortable and don't want to search - for anything - tend to want to stay in their comfort. Comfort can represent the inability to accept change - or on a deeper level - that the world has changed - or on another level - they have been lied to and the shock is sooooo much that they are frozen and unable to move in any direction let alone forward.

Much Peace...

<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in