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.

 

Most obvious chemtrails today in southern california. Check these out. (Pics)

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by killemall
 


Great pics.

Contrails or Chemtrails, it sucks pretty hard that clear skies are turned dreadfully grey soon after these wonderful jets pass by. Our area used to be known as the sunshine capital of the nation. Now 2 out of 3 of every day turns out out like that. Sad really.




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Goldcurrent
reply to post by killemall
 


Great pics.

Contrails or Chemtrails, it sucks pretty hard that clear skies are turned dreadfully grey soon after these wonderful jets pass by. Our area used to be known as the sunshine capital of the nation. Now 2 out of 3 of every day turns out out like that. Sad really.


There has been a steady decline in cloud-free days since the 1950s, in large part due to contrails from jet traffic. It was noticed first in the 1970s. Here's a news report on the topic from 1980:



I think the problem is that the change has been so gradual, and hidden by normal wether variability (and also varies from place to place), that most people have not really noticed any change.

It's very unlikely anything will change. There's no public pressure, and the cure would either be to fly lower, or less both of which would be very expensive (and any kind of technological fix, like exhaust scrubbers, would be vastly more expensive).



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


yes... i work on camp pen...

these were probably 75-100 miles to the south east of camp pendleton though.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by iSHRED
 


There are many possibilities to explain those contrails ("chemtrails" are a fantasy, and do not exist as claimed).

Everything from a holding pattern, for an Air Traffic Control delay of some sort. to this example I found from last Monday. Different part of California I realize, but it shows what can be seen, if you just know how to research:

United 9831, 26th December 2011

Looking further into it, I learned (as I already suspected) that the flight numbers of "9825" to "9834" are the United Airlines internal code for their test flights.

It is common practice to conduct test flights after certain maintenance procedures. As the above jet example (^ ^ ^) was as high as 41,000 feet, then if conditions were suitable for contrail formation at altitude, it would have made contrails for portion of its flight.

Here are the United Airlines flight numbering system:


0001-1299 UA Mainline
1300-1399 Test Flights
1400-1699 UA Mainline
1700-5199 Codeshare
5200-8099 United Express Passenger Flying
8100-8299 Radio Flight Numbers
8300-9770 Codeshare
9785-9814 Passenger Extra Section
9815-9824 Cargo Extra Section
9842-9866 Military Contract - Passenger
9867-9872 Military Contract - Cargo
9873-9877 Civil Air Movement - Passenger
9878-9882 Civil Air Movement - Cargo
9883-9907 Passenger Charters
9780-9782 Unpaid Publicity Flights
9783-9784 Unpaid Courtesy Flights
9825-9834 Test Flights
9835-9836 Familiarization/Demonstration
9997-9999 Scheduled Freighter in Passenger Equipment
9908-9923 Maintenance Ferry
9924-9927 Maintenance Ferry
9928-9967 Operational Positioning Flight
9968-9987 Paid Charter Positioning Flight
9993-9996 Scheduled Positioning



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by iSHRED
reply to post by abecedarian
 


yes... i work on camp pen...

these were probably 75-100 miles to the south east of camp pendleton though.



Wow, that's quite a coincidence. But actually, I'm the Emporer of Camp Pendleton and I say these were contrails from our jets. See what I did there?

BTW, does your employer know how you feel about them poisoning us?


Originally posted by iSHRED
A guy walked by me while i was taking these pics and i said "Look at that S#!T, their poisoning us from the sky."



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by iSHRED
reply to post by abecedarian
 


yes... i work on camp pen...

these were probably 75-100 miles to the south east of camp pendleton though.


To produce contrails, a plane needs to be AT LEAST 25,000 feet and above. The contrails you normally see in the sky are from planes flying between 32,000 and 42,000 feet. Therefore, it would be more normal to see contrails at a bit of a distance from an airport.

Put it this way: If you live right next to an airport and you see contrails, chances are that the planes producing those contrails came from/are going to a different airport than the one you live next to.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I live in east county San Diego and I saw those contrails yesterday. They were very unusual. Some were bent and squiggly. I saw one very fat contrail that dissipated in the center, leaving two thin parallel outlines. I couldn't help noticing. Some were cirlular and others at angles. It was a busy day, indeed. Sorry no pics.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



.....and I saw those contrails yesterday. They were very unusual. Some were bent and squiggly.


The nature of the (rightly, as you said contrails) in terms of what jet produced them will be difficult to determine, since there are so many flights to search through to find the "culprit".

Per my earlier example of the United test flight out of LAX on a different day, I found that by merely guessing, and entering the parameters into FlightAware, to look for matches. (Using "KLAX" to "KLAX" as the "departure point" and "destination", for example. On a hunch, since there is a jet owned by the Raytheon company, based out of LAX, that uses the call-sign "VooDoo1" when it flies, to conduct avionics tests. It was last up near the end of November, when I saw its contrails.....near Thanksgiving).

But anyways, the simple fact (you likely well know) is that the contrails, after they have formed, will be affected by any air currents, wind shear that is present, even up and down drafts in the atmosphere, to alter their appearance and cause the "bent and squiggly" look, as described above.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Your amazing, 1851 post in just under 3 months. Can you prove chemicals being sprayed from planes does not happen? I doubt it but please try.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 04:46 AM
link   
There are few other rational explanations for the whole world population having high levels of aluminum and barium and other things claimed to be in "chemtrails" in their blood, everywhere. Test your blood, and prove it wrong. Lots of people have test high for ridiculous levels of heavy metals. It's coming from somewhere?



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by iSHRED
 


Wow - just blatant ovals...no attempt to even hide it. Contrails are such a rare occurrence (usually in wartime) that it can be immediately discounted. There is a small but shrill segment of the population here that attempts to give credence to contrails. Safe to guess chemtrails first since these are the skies of our times and just like the passerby you spoke with...everyone knows it. Great!! pics OP!!



Hello again, hope you had a good holiday Luxor, anyway, on to business.

Please can you enlighten us as to what contrails have to do with wartime? Airliners leave contrails every minute of every day somewhere around the earth, so you statement can be immediately discounted.

It would also appear that a lot of people "know" that Elvis is alive and working in a Yorkshire petrol station, with exactly the same level of credibility as you dear



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by killemall
...Can you prove chemicals being sprayed from planes does not happen?...


If you can't prove something ISN'T happening, then it IS happening?



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
They are caused by planes that much is certain.

If they are chemicals they should be properly called chemtrails.

If they are air vapors they still persist so you could call it a man made cloud and hence artificial weather modification even if this is unintentional.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Depends on what is or isn’t happening like proving global warming, is it happening? Proving why people get cancer, is it in there gene or do they contracting through life, is cancer curable? Proving Bird flu, does it come from chickens or was it made in a lab? proving are we evolving or did we and have we stopped and why,
Proving planes don't spray?
What are they spraying and why and as for ice crystals I conditionally except they spread hundreds of square kilometres in the sky from a little exhaust and stay for many many hours blocking the sun to start with upon proof of claim.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by killemall
 


Of course this is a meaningless "challenge":


Can you prove chemicals being sprayed from planes does not happen?


There are many examples of actual spraying that can be accomplished by aircraft of many types. But NOT at altitudes above 30,000 feet, and certainly not by commercial airline passenger jets!!

However, in order for this myth and hoax of the so-called "chemtrails" (that can be, and are, demonstrably proven to be mere contrails) to exist, they (contrails) have to be shown and proven as something else.

The burden of proof lies with those making the "chemtrails" claims. Period.

Merely looking at cirrus clouds and calling them something else, without any sort of science to back it up, to measure, to test, is foolish.

And yes....yes, yes, yes, contrails are produced as a by-product of our technology (high bypass turbofan jet engines) and our burning of fossil fuels .....so it can be stated truthfully that contrails are "artificial" and indeed are "man-made clouds" of a sort.

It is a known scientific fact that fossil fuels make water vapor during the process of combustion. The heat breaks down constituent atoms that are part of the fuel, and combine with the other atoms obtained from the air itself (to include, also, the water vapor already present in the air). Have you never seen the water that drips out your car's exhaust pipes, on some days?

This graphic illustrates the compounds (to include H2O, which is also a molecular compound) that is generated by a typical jet engine, on an average:



(You can convert from the metric to Imperial measures....but the key point, there, is if there are 1.24 "tonnes" of water vapor ...*H2O*....produced for every ONE "tonne" of kerosene jet fuel.....then that ratio will stand true for any value. At a minimum, it is a 1:1 ratio......So, jet engines that burn kerosene add H2O, in vapor form, to the atmosphere. No need for any "spraying" equipment, the engines do it themselves).


The heat generated in a jet engine is higher, and the amount of fuel burned is substantially more, per hour, than an automobile engine.....so, jets produce a lot more water vapor.

Then, that water vapor, added to the existing air, behaves as water vapor in the atmosphere always does --- it behaves according to the saturation point that exists, and the ambient temperatures.

Modern high-bypass turbofan engines are far, far more fuel efficient than older low bypass or straight turbojets. So paradoxically, this increase in efficiency (driven by high oil prices, as we all know) results in not only a slightly less hot final exhaust, but the mere design of the engines......the actual way they provide their thrust.....makes the exhaust more conducive to contrail formation. Especially persistent contrails, for a broader range of initial conditions.

If one wishes to steer clear of the silly "chemtrail" websites and just took the time to study the science on this, one would see the truth in it. Unfortunately, reason is getting drowned out by hysterical "concern" (usually fake, By the way......there are people out there who shill for the "chemtrail" claims, knowingly putting out ridiculous claims and false "warnings" and false, incorrect information).


edit on Mon 2 January 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Again I say to you and your mates, PROVE IT is not so. Of course you cannot can you? All you can do is keeping up the same old dishonourable argument over and over again with no proof of anything. You say there is no such thing as chemtrails well prove it or kiss of the threads that you not wanted on and stop with you Richard cranium attitude.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by killemall
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Again I say to you and your mates, PROVE IT is not so.


it is up to you to prove they are not contrails....

Of course you cannot can you? All you can do is keeping up the same old dishonourable argument over and over again with no proof of anything.

You are the one making the claim they are chemtrails, it is up to you to prove that claim. Which you are unable to do....



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 


Where did you come from spoor? jump in mate have a go try proving chemtrails dont exist.
I know contrails exist and I know chemtrails exsit you guys are claiming chemtrails don't exsit so prove it.

Ice crystals that spread 100's and 100's of kilometers across the sky almost daily blocking the sun
:



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by killemall
 


People have already demonstrated that all of the visual attributes that people associate with "chemtrails" are the same visual attributes as contrails. However, some chemtrail believers still say "well, how do you know some of those things just look and act like contrails, BUT are actually chemtrails. Of course I can't prove that.

Here's an analogy I've heard before: "Can you prove that a certain apple isn't really a dragon egg? People who believe in dragon eggs say that dragon eggs camouflage themselves to look exactly like an apple -- inside and out. Of course, there would be no way for me to prove that any given apple isn't a dragon egg to the "dragon-eggs-disguised-as-apples" believers, because no matter what I say about the appleness of a certain apple, those dragon-egg believers would just say "Dragon eggs have that characteristic, also".

So does that mean every apple I see has an equal chance of really being a dragon egg? No. It does not.

Speaking of dragons, this whole argument of "You can't prove a contrail isn't really a chemtrail" reminds me a little of Carl Sagan's essay The Dragon in My Garage:

Link: The Dragon in my Garage, by Carl Sagan



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by killemall
Ice crystals that spread 100's and 100's of kilometers across the sky almost daily blocking the sun
:

Do you mean like a cirrus cloud?




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join