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.

 

Centres Of Population Spraying

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by uncleguss
 



I recently took a trip to Columbus, OH...


When you look at a road map, do you see "grids" sometimes, in the way the highways are laid out?

Take a look at this, it's centered on Columbus:

High Enroute H-10

This is the sort of Chart actually used by high altitude jets, like the commercial airliners that will sometimes form contrails when the atmospheric conditions are suitable. Each heavy black line represents a defined Jet Airway....and, the nature of air travel also means that the jets can fly in any direction needed, even "off route" sometimes, for various reasons.

Additionally, "grids" can seem to form because even though these routes are pegged to geographic locations over the Earth, once the contrail forms, it will then drift with whatever prevailing winds there are aloft.

For example, two airplanes, ten minutes apart, one after the other on the same route, same direction? First jet flies along and makes a contrail....the wind is at an angle to that route, so the contrail drifts with the wind. Second jet, ten minutes later, makes a contrail that is now parallel to the first, since the first has moved, with the wind.

Repeat this, and add flights in other directions that cross the first two examples at an angle, and you have a "grid".

Simple.

And, yes....."chemtrails" are bogus, you were right.




posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 


Enjoyed your thread and your observations
!!




What purpose could there be to covering centres of population and leaving the less


(sorry...your quote got cut short - the rest of it was about leaving less populated areas alone)

I've lived in both and though there are chemtrails in rural, and I mean outback, areas, they are nothing like what one sees in cities. Haven't given this answer before so I will toss it out: maybe they are drugging the population because a docile population is an easily controlled population. Anyone who orders up grids for the skies has got to be one major out of control control freak so extrapolating...



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


SO frigging ridiculous. There are more reports of contrails generally in urban areas because......drumroll.....there are more people!


But, the issue STILL remains.....this tossing about of the term "chemtrails" as if they were real, is the real nonsense part about this.

Not once, ever, never has ANY so-called "chemtrail" spraying been shown, proven, evidenced. Find just one, just do it, if you're a "believer" in this religious fantasy. Become instantly famous, and wealthy, on the Talk Show circuits!!

E-V-I-D-E-N-C-E.

Photos of the airplanes that are making so-called "chemtrails" (which, BTW, look and act and are identical to normal contrails, at high altitudes, and NEVER "fall" to the ground. Just how can they make the population "docile" with "something" that stays aloft, and never drops to the ground, and that blows with the very strong winds aloft, and eventually disperses and dilutes in all that atmosphere??)


Photos! Evidence of the activity, the loading of these "chemicals", the evidence of any spraying apparatus on the jets (passenger jets, since that's what are making contrails). The accounts of "whistle blowers".....ANYthing!!

Not one iota, so far. Zero. So, what does that tell a rational, and reasoning adult?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by uncleguss
 


The answer is already in your post. Nothing using the airport will leave a contrail because it would be too low, overhead traffic that is just passing over will be more likely to leave a trail because they are up at the most efficient cruising altitude where contrails form.

I have posted previously how I have photographed aircraft leaving no trail at all, even a short one, and they have been landing at or departing from a nearby airport when checked, the planes that leave visible trails are just passing through and often havent even taken off from, or intended to land in, this country!

For instance here's the Airbus Super Transporter that departed from Brough, Humberside, yesterday morning. No trail.



While here is a British Airways 747 en route from Washington, USA, to London leaving a trail as it is not yet descending .



Why does this mean that anyone has to be spraying something when it's what airliners do?
edit on 20-1-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 





SO frigging ridiculous. There are more reports of contrails generally in urban areas because......drumroll.....there are more people!


Your statement is unabashed nonsense. I've lived in major urban areas for most of my adult life and never noticed a chemtrail until I went to live in the middle of nowhere. People in the city are too busy and distracted to look up. I don't think you really understand urban versus rural dynamics.

The rest of your post is basically about the myth of persistent contrails. Since you haven't proven anything on that - just wasted alot of time on pseudo-scientific beetle dung, there doesn't seem to be any point there except blah blah blah.

I still think that an airborne sedative for a population gone wild over 2012 would be a brain- child for a control-freak psycho not averse to grids in the sky. Every day is a circus with this regime.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 





The rest of your post is basically about the myth of persistent contrails. Since you haven't proven anything on that - just wasted alot of time on pseudo-scientific beetle dung, there doesn't seem to be any point there except blah blah blah.


Let's not start trying to ask for proof of something,because no chemtrailer has even been able to bring any and I do mean any scientific proof of chemtrails, period.And you say persistent contrails are a myth, well my friend you may want to do a bit of research and I suggest this thread for starters

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Pay attention to the posts on there and then just keep going down the page and learn some things.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
I don't know about contrails or chemtrails but I do recall reading that the government has sprayed populated areas in the past to see how the people would react to whatever they were spraying. One of these places was Panama City, Fl, I believe I saw San Fransico also. Now I have to re research it. How worrisome...



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by DivineFem
 


Any links for this info?

second



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


If you want to theorize about persistant contrails - have at it!! But PLEASE don't tell me there is anything to learn there except someone's theory which is speculation (unless you're Einstein.) (And even that theory is having a hard time holding it's own these days.) And, now that we're on the subject, I'm not sure that the persistent contrail myth ever even made it to theory. Still may be just a hypothesis. Actually, now that you've got me started, I believe it was created as a propoganda tool to quiet a restless public occasionally casting a furtive glance skyward. That would take it completely out of the realm of science and place it squarely in the realm of Santa Claus and other myths perpetrated to encourage children to behave.

All this talk and nothing that speaks to the OP of why more in urban areas? It's an interesting question, don't you think?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
The reason I said 767 was mainly due to the wing, which has a broader chord than Airbus uses and is also broader than on the 737, and the engines look canted slightly inwards towards the intake, this effect also shows up on your last linked 767 image.


Originally posted by ProudBird
On second gander, you're probably right. The proportions indicate a wide-body. I would suggest an A330, but the flap track fairings lead me back to the Boeing:

You guys are over analyzing it, its really a lot simpler then this to tell its not a 737.
37’s have no landing gear doors…



edit on 1/20/2012 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Yes, I know......at first look, I thought I saw the main gear wheels in the belly, in the photo of the airplane we are discussing. SO, I jumped to "737". But, looked at it again, saw the two little black things were wrong position, and now will call those the air conditioning pack cooling air exit vents.


_____
Trivia for those who may be interested RE: the 737....because there are no gear doors to enclose the mains, they were designed to lie mostly flush with the fuselage surface, to minimize drag by smoothing the airflow as much as possible. However, since the wheel rims themselves have the same design concept, and shape and contour similar to your auto's wheel rims, the 737 is the only jet (that I know of) that has "hubcaps" attached to the wheel rims.

It is mandatory equipment for flight, as it is needed to reduce the drag that would occur if the open interior of the wheel were exposed.

(Of course, "mandatory" for all normal operations.....there are many components on airplanes that can be missing, or inoperative, and the airplane still flown legally, but with various restrictions and operational penalties. In some cases, there can be situations where it is no longer "fit" for revenue flights, but can still be operated under FAR Part 91, as needed for flights to some airport where proper repairs can be made, if unavailable at its current location for any reason. Some of these conditions can simply be noted in the logbook, and be legal......some conditions require a specific one-time waiver, called a "ferry Permit"...that's what the FAA calls it, in USA.

Other countries have similar rules......).



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


The fact that persistent contrails exist, have been measured, poked, prodded and otherwise studied is not a "theory" nor a "conjecture".

The word that applies, here, is "FACT".

Therefore, the discussion necessarily includes this as one of the "known knowns" that anyone with any knowledge and experience and training and logic and education knows.........



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


You are correct, but that does only tell you that's it's not a 737, not what it is. Which why I put my reasons for saying its a 767. Spotter nerds have had to learn to look for the little tell tale signs with which to identify what they are looking at ever since the worlds second aeroplane flew successfully

edit on 21-1-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


This chart does not disprove the chemtrail theory, it just proves pilots know where they are going. But thank you for the link to this site, if you are correct it should bring some clarity to the subject.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by uncleguss
 




This chart does not disprove the chemtrail theory....


Calling it a "theory" is far too generous, once you research the true definition of 'theory'.

But in any case, the link was to illustrate to non-pilots and other laypersons exactly why the contrails that are seen can sometimes seem to form in "grid patterns". That was the point. It's also fairly obvious that there is a LOT to learn in the field of aviation, and that it suffers often from misconception and oversimplification by those who lack the specific knowledge and experience skill sets.

And, "chemtrails" disprove themselves anyway, since there is absolutely zero evidence or proof of any kind....as well, the aforementioned segment of society who are experienced in aviation are immediately able to recognize all "chemtrail" claims as absurd, once the claimed "chems" are viewed.....since they look exactly like normal contrails, which we are all familiar with.



new topics




 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join