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.

 

Heavy "Spraying"* in Phoenix Today 2-1-12

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 


OK, I will bite, but then I am turning it in for the night. I have two theories which have no evidence to support them. Well the first one may, but it is just general observation on my part.

1. I believe that if they are spraying it would be something to kill off the bee population. The reason for this ties into other theories to the NWO or population reduction/ control. I think that, if they are killing off bees it would be to stop pollination, which could/would lead to a shortage of crops that rely on the bees for pollination.

Crops that rely on bees

2. I have heard that the spray consists of some type of metals. If this is true, then I would believe that there is a plan to alter the atmosphere due to some extenuating circumstance, such as trying to save the earth from a gigantic solar flare or some event like this. See, not all bad.

This is speculation on my part though. What I think it is, would be the First because I have noticed fewer bees then I remember growing up. It could just be that I did not grow up in AZ.

Anyway, there you go. Have a good night.




posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarshMallow_Snake
reply to post by jerryznv
 


OK, I will bite, but then I am turning it in for the night. I have two theories which have no evidence to support them. Well the first one may, but it is just general observation on my part.

1. I believe that if they are spraying it would be something to kill off the bee population. The reason for this ties into other theories to the NWO or population reduction/ control. I think that, if they are killing off bees it would be to stop pollination, which could/would lead to a shortage of crops that rely on the bees for pollination.

Crops that rely on bees

2. I have heard that the spray consists of some type of metals. If this is true, then I would believe that there is a plan to alter the atmosphere due to some extenuating circumstance, such as trying to save the earth from a gigantic solar flare or some event like this. See, not all bad.

This is speculation on my part though. What I think it is, would be the First because I have noticed fewer bees then I remember growing up. It could just be that I did not grow up in AZ.

Anyway, there you go. Have a good night.


Okay...cool...now we have a conspiracy!

The bee's seems plausible...but that would seem to mean death to the entire planet eventually!

As far as saving us from solar flares...well that is plausible too...but the giant solar flare that would end man kind seems unstoppable by anything that planes might spray into the sky!

Thanks though...now we have a conspiracy for sure...so...that coupled with some empirical science and samples might give us a direction!



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by MarshMallow_Snake
 


Please see my post at the end of page 4

;-)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by doryinaz
 


You say you know the difference, but what you wrote indicates that maybe there is a bit more still to learn. This is not an "attitude" intended to be rude, it is merely a fact. I don't sugar-coat facts:


and I know the difference between a front passing through....stratus clouds....


A front is usually preceded by high cirrus clouds. If by "stratus" you meant "cirrostratus", then you would be correct. However, the term "stratus" by itself is generally understood to mean low-level clouds composed of condensed water...as opposed to high-level cirrus type clouds, which due to the freezing cold at altitude are composed of tiny ice crystals:


Cirrus

– high-level, wispy clouds. The name originates from the Latin word meaning "curl of hair". These feathery clouds form very high up in the sky (at altitudes between 5 km and 14 km) where it is very cold. They are therefore made up of tiny ice crystals rather than water droplets. Cirrus clouds occur in warm air which is being slowly lifted over a large area by an approaching cold front, and they are therefore often the signal of bad weather.


Source

Another source, designed for boaters....mariners have been observing clouds as a way to "predict" weather for many centuries



.....and trails coming out the back of jets and making lines in the sky.....


Which are contrails. If one pays particular and close attention, one will notice that all the contrails, or "lines in the sky", originate directly in line with the engines....they are formed by the engine exhaust gases.

Not one picture of so-called "chemtrails" attributed to high altitude large passenger jets ever are seen appearing anywhere else, except directly form the engines, in the exhaust gases.


edit on Thu 2 February 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 

A couple of problems.

Where I live (in the tropics) it is very rare to see contrails. Our bees are dying but it's known why (a mite).
The atmosphere as is, is more than sufficient to protect the Earth's surface from a solar flare. It has been doing so for a very long time.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by jerryznv
 

A couple of problems.

Where I live (in the tropics) it is very rare to see contrails. Our bees are dying but it's known why (a mite).
The atmosphere as is, is more than sufficient to protect the Earth's surface from a solar flare. It has been doing so for a very long time.


I agree Phage...the atmosphere is doing a fine job...the global killer flare I was speaking of...has never happened...and in my life time probably won't!

If a CME where big enough and directly headed for earth...we have no hope...no planes spraying aluminum (or any other metal) is going to make much difference!

Neither of the OP's theories is plausible in my opinion...but now we have something to base the "spraying" theory on...however implausible they sound!



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 


I think I can address the "bee idea", and put it to bed, with some logic.
Consider that every pound of Jet A fuel burned will produce roughly another pound of water vapor. Excess water vapor added to the atmosphere, which then will sometimes condense, when the air is saturated sufficiently to begin with.

Now....a jet engine at cruise power settings will burn fuel at a rate of between 3,000 to 5,000 or 5,500 pounds per hour, depending on type of engine. A twin-jet at 3,000 PPH each engine is a total of 6,000 pounds per hour, yes?


OK....to keep it simple, this jet produces a contrail for one hour....that's about 6,000 pounds of visible water (in the form of ice crystals). Keep in mind that regardless whether the engine trails are visible or not, in flight, the water vapor is being produced.

But back to that one hour, and 6,000 pounds. The jet is around 30,000 to 41,000 feet above Sea Level, in cruise flight. The city of Phoenix is just over 1,000 feet above Sea Level. SO again, erring on the generous side, and using rounded numbers, let's account for 30,000 feet (or so) of air between the airplane, its contrail, and the ground.

6,000 pounds of *anything* dispersed into a volume of air that is conservatively 30,000 feet high by how wide? Double the airplane wingspan, maybe? Call it 250 feet, sound OK? And how long? Well, one hour at cruise airspeed would be somewhere around 450 miles, conservatively. 450 (nautical) miles X 6,076 feet in one NM = 2,734,200 feet. Multiply all that for the volume of airspace immediately beneath this hypothetical example:

30,000 X 250 X 2,734,200 = 20,506,500,000,000 cubic feet of air. With me so far?

The contrail itself? How thick shall we call it? Maybe 75 feet in height, once formed? I'll make it even biger, say 100 feet.

....so, 250 wide X 100 feet thick X 2,734,200 feet long = 68,355,000,000 cubic feet.

When you divide that big number (all that air) by the smaller number (exaggerated size of a contrail) it comes out a figure of 0.3% in comparison. ALL of that (hypothetical) contrail that is 450 miles long, accounts for just 0.3% of the total.
__________________________________________________
( Of course, I could have just divided the 30,000 feet of altitude by the 100-feet thick contrail to get the same ratio of 1/300, since the other dimensions are equal in this hypothetical....but, I wanted to show my work!!
)
__________________________________________________
Carrying on:

Imagine how tiny a concentration of anything that makes! For those who are keeping score at home, it is also equal to about 3 ppm (parts per million).

(Here is a calculator where you can convert percentage to ppm).

Feel free to check my math if you wish. (If you want smaller numbers, I converted the cubic feet to cubic miles: The big number works out to 139.31 cubic miles, and the smaller number is 0.464 cubic miles. Divide those, and the answer is still 1/300 ratio).

I think the math shows that the "bee theory" doesn't have merit? Considering the tiny concentration, and the other fact that "aiming" from over 30,000 feet is just plain impractical.......








edit on Thu 2 February 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 


On the bees, yes and no. If they are doing something like this, then I am sure that they would have a vault of some sort where they have bees, much like the seed vault in the article at antarctic. I do not recall where that is. That seed vault makes me think that this conspiracy is the more plausible of the two I mentioned.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 


I did not get to read this last night. I will check out your links and info today. Thank you for posting them.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 


I am not too familiar with this, so I need to ask. Why would Monsanto need aluminum resistant seed?

Also, the link to the Monsanto patent does not work. Can you fix this please?

Thanks!



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by MarshMallow_Snake
 

Believers in "chemtrails" like to point to the Monsanto patent as proof of "chemtrails" because they believe that aluminum is being sprayed, but this has always been a problem for farming. Aluminum is found in soil naturally (it comprises about 7% of the material in the Earth's crust). When soil is acidic aluminum becomes a problem for plants. It is no problem unless the soil is acidic.


Much of the world's cropland contains aluminum that stunts crops. But a new study has found a way to make plants grow tall in spite of the metal's toxic effects. The discovery, by plant biologists at the University of California, Riverside, suggests that genetic engineering could boost yields from fields that today are not ideal for growing crops.

Aluminum is common in soils--it's a major component of clay--but only in acidic soils does the metal form an ion that can dissolve into liquids and that's toxic to plants. Acidic soils make up as much as half the world's croplands, however, and aluminum toxicity is the main factor holding back crop growth in nearly 20 percent of the world's arable soils, including large areas of the United States east of the Mississippi River and northwestern Europe.

www.technologyreview.com...

It's been known for a long time.
1918

edit on 2/2/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks Phage. I appreciate the information you posted. I knew that there was aluminum in the soil, but not being to keen on farming and techniques, I did not know that it posed a threat to the crops.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
On February 1st, 2012 they sprayed Chemtrails all over the Country.
Why do you think the temperature is so warm?
Do you know this same time last year we had one of the worst winters ever "Groundhog Day Blizzard" of 2011.

January 31 – February 2, 2011 North American blizzard

Here is a video of the Chemtrails and the weatherman explaining why it is so warm these few days


edit on 2-2-2012 by dw31243 because: spelling



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by dw31243
 


That video (that you apparently made yourself) is a load of nonsense opinion, without any facts, except for what is directly misrepresented:


....and the weatherman explaining why it is so warm these few days


You plastered the ridiculous term "chemtrails" over nearly every square inch of the video, yet the actual "weatherman", who has the actual experience and knowledge, says NOTHING about "chemtrails". Your deception is clear for all to see.

The relevant part where the local Fox TV "weatherman" explains what is actually happening starts @ 4:15 in the video.


I suggest everyone watch the embed, and see for yourselves.

Contrails (since that is what are shown in the photos....contrails and cirrus cloud combinations) to NOT cause a "heatwave". On the contrary, during the daylight hours, additional cloud cover act as a cooling factor, due to reflectivity of the Sun's light. During the night, if they remain aloft, they can have a very, very mild "blanket" effect....maybe changing temperatures by a fraction of a degree, if at all

Making absurd claims in a YouTube video does nothing for education, understanding and the furtherance of science and knowledge.

Such nonsense does a disservice to those seeing facts and clarification about the world around us.

Furthermore, there have been a few other ATS threads recently popping up that are explaining the weather patterns seen so far this season. Partly to blame is a mild La Nina in the Pacific Ocean.

Do a web search, and educate yourself.

Here is one thread...ironically, the OP has it exactly backwards in the perceptions as defined in the Opening Post, but other ATS members contribute facts and evidence that refutes the title of the thread, and go on to explain the weather patterns of late:

Why is so cold everywhere in the world! Are we experiencing a small Ice Age?

Pretty hilarious, don't you think?? ^ ^ ^ That thread title, and the assertions of a "heatwave" in the video above?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by dw31243
 

So your so-called chemtrails are a new phenomenon this year? Your video explains how last winter was colder and snowier; therefore, am I to assume that there were no chemtrails?

EDIT TO ADD:
In the U.S., the winter of 1966-1967 was actually warmer than this winter has been so far, and so was the winter of 1949-1950. What was the cause of those unseasonable temperatures?

I'm not debating global warming -- I'm just debating "chemtrails" being the cause of this winter being warm.


edit on 2/2/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarshMallow_Snake
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks Phage. I appreciate the information you posted. I knew that there was aluminum in the soil, but not being to keen on farming and techniques, I did not know that it posed a threat to the crops.


Remember though it's not the aluminum that's the problem - aluminum is everywhere. It's just the regions that have high acidity.

Adding more aluminum to the soil would not change that. If anything it would make the soil LESS acidic.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by MarshMallow_Snake
 


I have noticed a trend with your thread. You started with a very polite post and nicely requested that it remain that way. For the most part, it has. I have enjoyed this thread much more than most of the chemtrail threads I have participated in. We man not change your mind, and for that matter we may not even be right, but not being called a disinfo agent or shill was refreshingly pleasant. Thank you.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by dw31243
 


wouldn't the sky need to be mostly covered in order to affect the ground temperature? I have seen when it gets very cloudy in the late evening and stays that way, it will remain warm in the area under cover, but almost the whole sky needs to be covered for that affect and they have to be very low clouds. Contrails are way up there and while there have been quite a few of them at times, I don't think I have ever seen the sky completely covered by them. And in your example, wouldn't it have to be all day every day to have that prolonged affect?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


I do try to be civil. I did get a little testy with one person, but I checked that as soon as I realized it. I do not enjoy being ridiculed or belittled, much like the rest of us
. It is pretty easy to do so hiding behind the cloak of the internet, but why bother, right? It only makes for trouble. Thank you for complimenting that. I appreciate it.

Now, on to this topic here... As I stated earlier, I am not sure if this stuff is even true. I tend to lean toward believing it because it makes as much sense to me as it does not... (if that makes sense). I can see both sides being true... and I hope that all the non-believers are right (which I am sure most think they are
).

Either way, I like discussing topics and I like when people present information to look at. That is what makes threads and this site great. People that come in here and just dismiss everything without listening of taking in both sides just drive me nuts.

With that said, Network Dude (I am a sys admin myself), you have a great day and rest of your week!



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


Right, I agree with that. I just never heard of the aluminum threat to crops before this, and it makes total sense.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join