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 onecraftydude
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
See my rebuttal to defcon for your answer.
BTW, did you copy and paste his answers?
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by onecraftydude
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
See my rebuttal to defcon for your answer.
BTW, did you copy and paste his answers?
Seems unlikely - since the replies are not actually cut and paste copies of each other. If you think they are then I think you have identified your problem - very poor reading skills!!
However I think you are just trying a little ad hominem attack...and made yourself look silly.
Your answers to Defcon fail to address factual information - so since you send me to them I presume you actually have no factual or verifiable information at all - you are just repeating hearsay - like all the chemtrail arguments for the last 15 or however many years.
I suggest you read what I wrote. I addressed each part individually. What "Facts" did you need to know about me driving a car or buying food at the grocery store?
I guess showing a video of sky turds is hearsay? I would get some "Factual" samples of the exhaust if I could, but I have not spent enough time worrying about that yet. Either way you are on one side of an argument and will not listen to anyone you think is on the other side.
For me this topic is not as simple as agreeing with one side or the other. I am trying to stay neutral here, but I am being pushed by contrail supporters to defend myself. To me that seems like an attack. Either way I am just sick of sky turds. I don't care what they are other than what I need to know to get rid of them.
So please feel free to attack my manhood or whatever else you need to do to make yourself look important and I will continue to say I hate sky turds and want them out of the sky in my general vicinity.
Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by onecraftydude
You're in Florida, correct?
As I suggested, a year-long diary of observations eliminate the natural Human memory bias, when it comes to a person's "pet peeves" on any annoyance.
But, barring that Herculean effort, why not just look at what others have already compiled, at in general, for the State of Florida?:
Days of Sunshine Per Year in Florida (average)
Here, someone compiled a number of U.S. cities, in descending order of days of Sun:
World Facts and Figures
Here's another version, with one column showing the many decades (one instance over a hundred years) of data sets to compile the results --- but only through 2004:
RANKING OF CITIES BASED ON % ANNUAL POSSIBLE SUNSHINE IN DESCENDING ORDER
Also, when you think about it, contrails are long and thin....hardly seems likely they'd have such a deleterious effect on Solar PV panels..........
Originally posted by onecraftydude
That has nothing to do with normal cloud formation or natural occurrences and is 100% man-made. That means since we made them we can get rid of them and that is my argument in a nutshell.
Originally posted by onecraftydude
But it was never my intention to debate the exhaust gasses.
Originally posted by onecraftydude
Then why not say that instead of what you said? If you claim to be accurate and intelligent being a debunker then at least be accurate?
physics.aps.org...
Raindrops begin forming when water vapor condenses on micrometer-sized particles of dust floating in the atmosphere. The dust particles grow to millimeter-sized droplets, which are heavy enough to begin falling. As they fall, the droplets accumulate more and more moisture, until they become the large raindrops that we see here on the ground.
en.wikipedia.org...
Soot is a general term that refers to impure carbon particles resulting from the incomplete combustion of a hydrocarbon. It is more properly restricted to the product of the gas-phase combustion process but is commonly extended to include the residual pyrolyzed fuel particles such as cenospheres, charred wood, petroleum coke, and so on, that may become airborne during pyrolysis and that are more properly identified as cokes or chars.
Originally posted by defcon5
The point is though that there is nothing more sinister about contrails then there is about running your car engine. If you hoisted your car up to those altitudes it would probably leave trails behind it as well. As a matter of fact, down in Antarctica you can see aircraft leave persistent contrails on the ground.
Originally posted by Drew99GT
Originally posted by onecraftydude
That has nothing to do with normal cloud formation or natural occurrences and is 100% man-made. That means since we made them we can get rid of them and that is my argument in a nutshell.
That would mean the end of commercial and military aviation. Even if you believe in chemtrails, planes made persistent contrails long before the chemtrail conspiracy came about. Take a look at these photos.
contrailscience.com...
There's pictures of gasoline radial engine powered squadrons of WWII bombers producing persistent contrails for cripes sake. Were they adding barium and aluminum to the gasoline back then in an attempt to geoengineer the Earth's atmosphere? I doubt it, because they were to busy fighting the Germans.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by onecraftydude
Planes could fly lower to drop into air that is not conducive to contrails forming but this will decrease fuel efficiency and will make flying more expensive as the airliners will pass on the extra cost to the customer.
Or get used to it, if you're concerned about pollution, jet exhaust isn't a concern compared to all of the exhaust and smog created on ground level.
Originally posted by onecraftydude
I feel like you debunkers are stuck back in the 40's. You think that airplane engines will always do what they are now because you have no vision. How do you think technology takes a leap? Do you think it happens when people defend the status quo for no better reason than "It has always been this way"? You are part of the problem even if you are well meaning because you prevent anything new from being implemented.
I am identifying a problem and showing REAL results from the formation of clouds that are directly traceable to airplanes and the argument is that they have always been that way so it is fine, move along. Can you see how that attitude can prevent moving forward with answers and innovation? Probably not.
A good example of what I am talking about is seen in computer engineering. Back in the 70's people were amazed at a dot that could be controlled on the screen with a handheld joystick. Then they were amazed when there was an operating system that allowed a user to move from one computer to another and operate it the same way. Leaps and bounds were made through innovation and vision by people who were driven to find solutions to problems.
I am simply identifying a problem and challenging others to find solutions to it. That may be a different engine design or different fuel or even a different airframe. I will leave that up to the people who want to take on this task and have the background to make improvements in designs.
I predict that one day we will travel without leaving a trail.
There will be a huge fight leading up to this in which the supporters of the status quo will defend their position tirelessly for no better reason than "It has always been this way".
If Dan Akroyd knew his pic was being used as an avatar for someone who won't admit that something is being released other then moisture intentionally from the back of planes?