Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Chemtrail Heatwave in January 2012

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
In the Midwest of the United States we have been having a heat wave in January when it should be freezing and snowing. Today's high is 42 degrees with Chemtrails and no snow or rain.

www.weather.com

During this heatwave we have been getting chemtrails from Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio non-stop. They are even spraying at night. I have counted over 12 planes spraying all at once over Illinois. It seems to me like a massive operation.

Is the sun getting too hot for the earth? Is global warming not man made but caused by the sun getting too hot? Are the Chemtrails to block the heat and radiation from the Sun? Is anyone else across the world experiencing these Chemtrails and a heat wave too in January when it should be cold and snowing?


Here are the pictures and videos of the Chemtrails across the United States on January 5 2012 during this Chemtrail Heatwave:


No puedo olvidarme chemtrails


Chemtrail Heatwave: January 5 2012

Chicago, Illinois



Dyer, Indiana



Mills, Ohio





Videos:

Chicago, Illinois



Dyer, Indiana



Mills, Ohio




edit on 6-1-2012 by dw31243 because: Spelling




posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by dw31243
 


The temperature at the SURFACE has nothing.....let me repeat, NOTHING to do with conditions and temperatures and relative humidity and water vapor saturation at HIGH ALTITUDE.

Please, this has been personally explained to you countless times.

Spamming these photos from around the USA of normal contrails serves no purpose.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Same here in the Northwest...no snow or moisture for 3 months now and rather warm weather 50's instead of 20's.

I have often thought Chemtrails were not a way of population control or poison as it affects too many, but used to reflect sunlight.
edit on 6-1-2012 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
"Chemtrails" have been reported for years when there was no heatwave.

What is evidence there is any causal linkage for this year?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by dw31243
 


Astute observations!!
Here, in Las Vegas, the temperatures continue 10 degrees above normal and that normal is based on the new normal which means an average of escalations the past decade. It's currently 64 degrees and that's at an altitude of around 1700 ft. Night time lows have been in the 50's. Chemtrail making is not in evidence today but the haze creating a gray blue sky is. It's one of those drive-in movie screen sky days.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
(((I do not agree with the OPs speculations about heat and chemtrails, only appreciate the post)))

I was thinking about documenting the massive chemtrailing today as a matter of fact. The past couple days over suburban Chicago, it has been absolutely thick with the streams...

And by the way, before any of you go off with the whole "chemtrail vs. contrail" arguement... I have lived near o'hare airport my whole life, okay? I know damned well what is a regular vapor trail and what is not.

What we're witnessing is streaks of white with globs hanging off of them, in criss cross patterns, which do NOT dissapate in even 10 minutes, and of course gradually become a white haze on the horizon.

I appreciate this post, as it is extremely local and thus relevant to myself.

When are people going to knock it off with the denial?
edit on 6-1-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: clarifying



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


Can you enlighten me on a few points that I disagree with, but would like to know your perspective if you dont mind?

why do you feel that living next to an airport helps with recognising contrails?

What is it about white streaks, criss cross patterns and hanging around for more than ten minutes and spreading into a haze that you find odd? What convinces you that contrails don't do this?

In short, what is informng your opinion?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 



What we're witnessing is streaks of white with globs hanging off of them, in criss cross patterns, which do NOT dissapate in even 10 minutes, and of course gradually become a white haze on the horizon.


Photos for comparison would come in handy....but, how about these??:

Google Images search


Any similarities? I know, it's a hodge-podge of photos......

....but, you describe typical contrails, that can be affected (after forming) in various ways....whether they dissipate or not, or how they are altered by winds and airflows and wind shear and up/down drafts, etc.

I mean.....haven't you ever seen a cloud change its shape???


EDIT to add......why cannot ATS be a place of learning and education?? There are a lot of people who know many things, here.

Not every bloody thing in the World is a "conspiracy".

:bnghd:
edit on Fri 6 January 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


Can you enlighten me on a few points that I disagree with, but would like to know your perspective if you dont mind?

why do you feel that living next to an airport helps with recognising contrails?

What is it about white streaks, criss cross patterns and hanging around for more than ten minutes and spreading into a haze that you find odd? What convinces you that contrails don't do this?

In short, what is informng your opinion?



I would be happy to.

1) Living near an international airport makes be able to observe many types of airplane all year round, in varying altitudes, weather conditions and temperatures. Thusly,

2) I constantly witness normal contrails (e.g. "short-lived," unform streaks which always dissapate in a matter of minutes if not seconds after the plane had passed.) This is under evey array of conditions.

3) I understand that contrails are mere water vapor... which dissapear sortly after being dispersed.

My opinion is not that of an expert, but of an experienced observer.

I suppose what makes it seem strange to me is simply the inconsistancy of it. I will watch one plane go by, billowing this aerosol, and a moment later, at roughly the same altitude and speed, i witnedd one with a perfectly normal contrail...

Or even more so, one day the sky will be covered in these streaks, and the next, almost identical day, there are none or very few.

My question to you is why does it NOT seem strange to you?

edit on 6-1-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: furthermore



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Personally I think people posting in the Chem trail threads should also post their age too.
I cannot even count on all my fingers and toes how many people said I have false memories.
I have no false memories and I am 52 years old, I remember when the sky's were deep blue and yes jets flew over head then.
Don't tell me what I have seen and have not seen please. I have no slippage of the mind and am quite sound.
Actually I could probably do most of you in with some simple math equations going head to head.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
havent noticed to many chemtrails here in wyoming
supposed to be our coldest month can get -40 and well
its not even cold enough for a jacket, not normal



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I live in southern Illinois.

No chemtrails here


Nice weather though


I have done my research on contrails, relative humidity, and altitude.............Have you?

One serious question..........................

What are they spraying to make it warm up



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Actually if the truth be told,Storks are really responsible for all the paranoia over chemtrails......


(Not a Photoshop by the way,just a stroke of luck).



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imagewerx
Actually if the truth be told,Storks are really responsible for all the paranoia over chemtrails......


(Not a Photoshop by the way,just a stroke of luck).


Thanks for contributing so smartly to this thread.
Have you got anything to add or are you just set on derailing this thread?
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


Living "near" an International, or any airport, has no bearing whatsoever on contrail sightings. Anywhere within about a 75 to 100 mile radius of the airport you "live near" when the airplanes you are watching are arriving or departing there......they will not make contrails, since they are too low.

The one good benefit (perhaps) of being "near" the airport may come with your ability to identify airplane types.

But......this is being needed to be repeated so often, it's time to tear one's hair out (what I have left).


Now.....using your great skills at airplane identification, please use that to further understand in future.

Here, this website may assist as well, in airplane identification:

www.airliners.net...



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


shows what you know... don't it?

if that bit about 75 to 100 miles was even a coherant thought, you would have an easy explaination as to why (living less than 20 miles from ohare) I see them a l l t h e t i m e.
edit on 6-1-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: duh



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 





3) I understand that contrails are mere water vapor... which dissapear sortly after being dispersed.



Classic Persistent Contrail


This is a classic example of a persistent contrail. The plane generating it is no longer in the area, yet this very thin and linear cloud remains across the sky. This contrail is quite thin - definitely less than the width of an index finger - yet it is very clear and continuous.
Note there are also some isolated cumulus clouds in this photo.
Photo by Doug Stoddard in Kiev, Ukraine.

Compact Persistent Contrail


This is another nice example of a persistent contrail. This contrail is quite compact and well-defined, yet it has clearly been in the sky for some time since the passage of the plane. Note there is some indication near the edges of the swirling air motions induced by the passage of the jet, but this contrail is holding together very well. While it is somewhat wider than the previous example, it has not exceeded the index finger test. Photo by Carol Clark in Oregon.

science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/contrails/contrails-persistent. html

There are more examples and pics in the link........................

Watch it........................Proudbird takes the geo forum serious




posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 

Come on,where's your sense of humour? I was just having a laugh
.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


Thank you for that. Although, I'm fully aware of persistant contrails. Even so, this is not budging me from the assertion that there is a difference.

Also, I'm not worried about proudbird or anyone else... I take it seriosly too. Perhaps too much pride is muddlng some peoples perceptions... but that's neither here nor there.

edit on 6-1-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: typos



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


Oh, dear.......first, your quote:


if that bit about 75 to 100 miles was even a coherant thought, you would have an easy explaination as to why (living less than 20 miles from ohare) I see them a l l t h e t i m e.


Now......the contrails you see are NOT....I repeat, NOT local arrivals or departures, if you are near the airport you mention...not to THAT airport.

You are seeing contrails from jets that are merely "passing by".....to other more remote destinations, and from other more remote origins.

Understand this, please. The way a jet descends can be simplified in a "3 to 1 ratio"......for every 3 miles of forward travel, you can expect to lose about 1,000 feet. Of course, I mixed "miles" and "feet" there, but it's easy to remember....if you convert 3 miles to feet, you get (we use Nautical miles, so it's 6,076 feet per)....3 X 6,076 = 18,228 feet.....so, for every 18,228 feet horizontally, in a typical descent, you lose (when at normal airspeed) about 1,000 feet vertically.

THAT is our "rule of thumb" guideline....not "hard-and-fast", just a general guideline.

OK??

NOW! In order to descend from the altitudes where you make contrails.....let's say at a "minimum" 25,000 feet.....to be able to get down to land......QUESTION: HOW far away from the airport do you have to begin your descent?? Keeping in mind, the "rule of thumb" of "3 to 1" as I described??

Hmmmm?





new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join