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.


Chemtrail Heatwave in January 2012

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:51 PM
reply to post by Imagewerx

I enjoyed that - true British humour and well executed (a little levity never hurt no one)

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:53 PM
Funny enough as I was driving home from work yesterday I looked up in the sky and saw many trails throughout the sky. Criss crossed, horizontal, vertical you name it. Even mentioned it to my buddy when I dropped him off at his house. Live in Southwestern Michigan, and the weather is abnormal. Had 1 storm last week that lasted about 2 days then 40s, might even have hit 50 today.

I remember not too many years ago it would start snowing in November. Here it is January and we had a hiccup of snow. Weather is strange to say the least. Not complaining though, I work outside in an unheated open building so to say it gets a bit nippy is an understatement lol.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:54 PM
Thank you, I did say straight off that I disagreed, it is only fair if I reply with my own view, for comparison;

Originally posted by Aqualung2012

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,

It is my experience as an aviation nut of four decades standing that the prevalence of trails has nothing to do with proximity to airports. Aircraft landing or taking off at Leeds/Bradford, Doncaster Robin Hood or Manchester (the three closest to me) never leave any trails when I've photographed them. Even when I'm at home, when I check an aircraft I have photographed on flightglobal atlas (a tracker) the ones not leaving a trail have either taken off or are landing at one of them and so are relatively low. Everything I've photographed whilst leaving a trail is higher up and heading either to the USA or a mainland European city (east/west) or a domestic flight heading to/from London or Scotland. I've posted some of these in the research thread at the top of this board (such as here )

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.

I also notice lots of these, but also all of the others you've described, from my own house, I've posted quite a few pictures in cherubbaby's thread here However there is nothing suspicious about these trails as they behave exactly as I would expect them to. This isn't to say that there cannot be anything 'chem' about them. Only that the behaviours I asked you about cannot be used as proof that there is, because it is normal and expected at those heights and 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'm no expert either, but we clearly think differently. I understand trails to be tiny ice crystals that sublimate and disappear quickly on days where the RH is low, and that linger amongst the cirrus clouds (even helping promote their creation) when it is high.

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.

I am conscious that it is impossible to judge altitude and speed by sight from the ground, a fact frequently brought home to me by the stats from the tracker I use, I am also familiar with the vagaries of the atmosphere which can vary quite a lot in a small area and also that the conditions I experience on the ground are utterly unrelated to what is 25-35,000ft over my head and that if the weather is the same as yesterday for me, it doesn't mean its the same where the jets are. What I have learned about the atmosphere and about aircraft fits like a glove when I'm observing aircraft and the trails they do or don't leave, so I don't find it odd or mysterious.

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

I hope that answers you, though I dont expect to convince you, thats not my aim. Just to try to exchange viewpoints without it becoming a slagfest

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:55 PM
reply to post by ProudBird

Well done, and if I stand corrected... THAT shows what you know. However, I've got to get to a concert tonight, and so I don't have time to solve your math problem. I would like to take a second to say I apologize for my demeaning tone.

All I know is there are plenty of low altitude contrails and chemtrails observed by myself and everyone else in this area, so my point stands firm.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:59 PM
reply to post by waynos

Now THATS an answer, and thank you very much.

You clearly have more advanced understanding of this and have demonstrated that well and politely.

I just think there is a difference. Glad we can agree to disagree.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:00 PM
reply to post by Aqualung2012

"low altitude" contrails??

Well, now we get into another issue.....the ability to judge height, by eye alone.

Enjoy the concert, there are ways, when you get back, to do that.....a little research is in order.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:03 PM
reply to post by waynos

Hello another thread about so-called "chemtrails", this came up in a mention being an avid "skywatcher" and photographer.

I raised the point that, like yourself, there are thousands upon thousands of others, with many websites devoted to them.....and this was all to answer a purely "hypothetical" question about so-called "chemtrails".....that they ("chemtrails") might be "possible" with no one knowing.

The fact of so many avid aviation enthusiasts dispels that idea, straight away......

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:07 PM

Originally posted by Imagewerx
reply to post by Iwinder

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

I lost my humour when I lost my deep blue sky's, I take this topic quite serious and I think most people do here.
Humor is for gag sites or whatever you want for fun.
If you want to post funny stuff keep to the grey area.
Or better yet go to another site where your humor is appreciated.
Regards, Iwinder

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:13 PM
reply to post by ProudBird

Well yes, and when you look at a site like, I can see that I'm really small time by comparison with those guys. NOTHING would escape their attention. The high res photography they achieve is amazing and to read their notes, well, even I think some of them are a touch anal, lol

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:21 PM
Here is the bottom line!

Are there not 1000's of flights every day, every week,...etc.

To the same cities, with the same flight #'s...........Multiple days with a near identical weather pattern....whether it is cold or hot or in the middle. One day, normal contrails, then the next day, hazy insanity.

Why the inconsistency.....Why would we not see this madness every day in any kind of consistent manner???

I have taken 50 to a 100 pictures over the last couple months over Memphis, Tn., and plan to start a thread based on consistent observations, and daily weather patterns.

edit on 6-1-2012 by radpetey because: Can not seem to put together a complete thought!

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:28 PM
It's obvious something is up with the weather the past couple months. The forecast here (Alberta) is not accurate. They have been having a tough time getting temperatures and conditions right for even that night or the next day. It's been way too warm for way too long this winter. Environment Canada predicted a terrible cold and snowy winter and it's relatively tropical with little snow in fact. I can play guitar outside in a t shirt most days. And at night it might stay fairly warm or sneak right down to -20, no help knowing what exactly might happen from the forecast. I'd say during the daytime it's been easy to overshoot the high by 10 degrees on any given day. I mean 100km winds and grass fires? In January? Grass fires?

I'm not saying it's chemtrails. But I am saying it's human.

As for chemtrails, I am convinced they happen. We humans do absolutely everything available to us. Hey look, genetics! Let's ruin our food! This stuff is so reactive we can't store it and so terrible for the environment we can't dispose of it there, what should we do with it? Developed nations water supplies! These chemicals have interesting properties in the atmosphere and may have applications but definitely cause heavy metal poisoning in humans, let's study them over major cities! It just fits the pattern. We are uncivilized and unintelligent, of course we wreck the air.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:36 PM
reply to post by GoatwolfeWolfgoate

But I am saying it's human.

I say that we as a species expect the ever changing climate and ecosystem to stay the same.............The whole 80-100 years that someone spends on this planet is nothing compared to the geological timeframe......

I am saying this is where people are confused........

Why does it have to be human, if the weather changes?

Causes of Change Prior to the Industrial Era (pre-1780)

Changes in the Earth's orbit: Changes in the shape of the Earth's orbit (or eccentricity) as well as the Earth's tilt and precession affect the amount of sunlight received on the Earth's surface. These orbital processes -- which function in cycles of 100,000 (eccentricity), 41,000 (tilt), and 19,000 to 23,000 (precession) years -- are thought to be the most significant drivers of ice ages according to the theory of Mulitin Milankovitch, a Serbian mathematician (1879-1958). The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Earth Observatory offers additional information about orbital variations and the Milankovitch Theory.
Changes in the sun's intensity: Changes occurring within (or inside) the sun can affect the intensity of the sunlight that reaches the Earth's surface. The intensity of the sunlight can cause either warming (for stronger solar intensity) or cooling (for weaker solar intensity). According to NASA research, reduced solar activity from the 1400s to the 1700s was likely a key factor in the “Little Ice Age” which resulted in a slight cooling of North America, Europe and probably other areas around the globe. (See additional discussion under The Last 2,000 Years.)
Volcanic eruptions: Volcanoes can affect the climate because they can emit aerosols and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Aerosol emissions: Volcanic aerosols tend to block sunlight and contribute to short term cooling. Aerosols do not produce long-term change because they leave the atmosphere not long after they are emitted. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the eruption of the Tambora Volcano in Indonesia in 1815 lowered global temperatures by as much as 5ºF and historical accounts in New England describe 1816 as “the year without a summer.”
Carbon dioxide emissions: Volcanoes also emit carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas, which has a warming effect. For about two-thirds of the last 400 million years, geologic evidence suggests CO2 levels and temperatures were considerably higher than present. One theory is that volcanic eruptions from rapid sea floor spreading elevated CO2 concentrations, enhancing the greenhouse effect and raising temperatures. However, the evidence for this theory is not conclusive and there are alternative explanations for historic CO2 levels (NRC, 2005). While volcanoes may have raised pre-historic CO2 levels and temperatures, according to the USGS Volcano Hazards Program, human activities now emit 150 times as much CO2 as volcanoes (whose emissions are relatively modest compared to some earlier times).
These climate change “drivers” often trigger additional changes or “feedbacks” within the climate system that can amplify or dampen the climate's initial response to them (whether the response is warming or cooling). For example:

Changes in greenhouse gas concentrations: The heating or cooling of the Earth's surface can cause changes in greenhouse gas concentrations. For example, when global temperatures become warmer, carbon dioxide is released from the oceans. When changes in the Earth's orbit trigger a warm (or interglacial) period, increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide may amplify the warming by enhancing the greenhouse effect. When temperatures become cooler, CO2 enters the ocean and contributes to additional cooling. During at least the last 650,000 years, CO2 levels have tended to track the glacial cycles (IPCC, 2007). That is, during warm interglacial periods, CO2 levels have been high and during cool glacial periods, CO2 levels have been low (see Figure 1).) /pastcc.html

There is plenty to read up on in this article.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by radpetey

I am curious to see how you elaborate on this thought.....and where you take it.......

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 07:17 PM
reply to post by liejunkie01

I don't dispute that the Earth can change climate due to factors independent from human. But I do think that our laundry list of environmentally damaging practices is the more logical place to turn first for scrutiny if and when we are certain that climate has adjusted.

We've interrupted every ecosystem everywhere, reduced the numbers of all of nature - which works with the environment to maintain homeostasis with the atmosphere. Our direct impact to the air is only one part of the equation of how we damage it. Our affect on the environment affects the air because the environment maintains the air.

It's clear that the Earth and nature can withstand a whole lot. Maybe humans can too. But our practices are clearly detrimental to both ourselves and our environment. We might be able to do some real lasting damage, but we'll probably marginalize ourselves before achieving such a dubious place in the history of nature. Our impact can't be denied however, and I believe it is this impact that is likely the cause of any climate change going on in our time.

If however climate change isn't us, that is more worrisome because we can predict, and maybe if necessary we could control, our own human impact. The scope of any other potential cause than humans could be much larger if this is the case.

If I think about the entirety of human retardation and dissonance, chemtrails seem a drop in the bucket. No one should adopt this attitude however. Corruption spreads like cancer and tyranny wins outright when good people do nothing.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 02:31 AM
reply to post by Silk

Thank you Silk,nice to see that some people haven't had the sense of humour bypass operation.

Back on topic,want to to know one of the things I think is responsible for the change in our weather patterns (apart from the weather itself?)We do MOTs at work and as time goes on we see more and more cars failing the test because emissions are way too high.In spite of the Toyota Prius' of this world and all the other leaner and greener cars being sold (we still see VERY few of these in the UK),there's still an ever increasing number of cars on our roads,all of which are pumping the same sort of stuff into our atmosphere.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 10:07 AM
reply to post by ProudBird

One observation I have made is that almost 100% of the time when a cold front is approaching, they pummel the sky with these things. They begin operations about 24 hours before it's arrival.

Another observation I have made is that generally speaking, the majority of their patterns follow the path of the sun. However, they will create patterns to the north of the path of the sun.

If you will get you a pair of good non-polarized sunglasses, you will notice the color of these trails to be blueish in appearance as they exit the engines.

I started paying close attention to clouds in general in March of this year, as I witnessed an earthquake cloud over Memphis, Tn. on the same day as the Japan quake.

From that moment on I think I went ATS on the skies, and have become obsessed with this matter of cloud anomalies and earthquake prediction. Hence, since I was looking up anyway, I thought I would start paying attention to this anomaly as well.

I am a landscape contractor so I have plenty of time to observe this stuff all day long.........more to come!

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 10:14 AM
reply to post by dw31243

I wrote a thread about this strange warm weather we are
having here in ohio.I am not used to it being this warm in
january.The temp was 58 degrees yesterday and it is 43
degrees outside now.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by mamabeth

I cannot comment on your local weather, but some of the views expressed in this thread reminded me that there were some unusually hot days back in January 1998 too. The reason why this apparently random fact is memorable to me is that when me and my daughter were driving to an away match in Peterborough during the 1997-98 football season to watch our local side, Rotherham United, once we were off the motorway we drove the rest of the way to the ground with the windows open! Unheard of normally, so I guess it can be remarked that freak weather conditions are not new.
edit on 7-1-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 11:17 AM
reply to post by radpetey

One observation I have made is that almost 100% of the time when a cold front is approaching, they pummel the sky with these things. They begin operations about 24 hours before it's arrival.

Did you stop to think that the cold, moist air proceeding the cold front might have something to do with the contrails? In other words, it is the weather which is responsible for the contrails?

In conclusion, two main meteorological situations are found which have many persistent contrails:
(a) slow ascent of upper air far ahead of a surface warm front often near jet streams, and
(b) in more convective and turbulent regions with strong winds ahead of a surface cold front.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:45 PM
reply to post by Phage

I meant to mention that.

But the simple fact is that not all pre-front atmospheric conditions contain moisture.

Come on, your way smarter then that

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in