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.

 

Geoengineering - caught in the act?

page: 31
121
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
This is the great part of ATS
you can watch men try to form public opinion,
and change history, right before your eyes.




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 





Perhaps you can provide some sources so I can know this is not "just another opinion on your part."


www.faa.gov...


A common impurity in jet fuel is sulfur (~0.05% by weight), which contributes to the formation of small particles containing various sulfur species. These particles can serve as sites for water droplet growth in the exhaust and, if water droplets form, they might freeze to form ice particles that compose a contrail




Perhaps you can provide some sources which indicate that contrails have a net cooling effect.


I can provide sources that say more studies need to be done to determine the overall net effect on the albedo.

You know that contrails have at least two effects on climate temperature. They absorb or insulate heat radiating from the Earth and they also reflect heat from the Sun.

The debate is still whether the amount of the Suns heat reflected outweighs the amount of Earth heat prevented from escaping.

Each cloud is unique and their aerosol composition and distribution all are factors in the radiative forcing effects. It's been determined that smaller aerosol particles in clouds have better effects of increasing the albedo.


Here is the paper that broke the silence on SRM Geoengineering - Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma?
Paul J. Crutzen

edit on 20-3-2012 by SteelToe because: (no reason given)


References used in the Crutzen essay

Papers that cite the Crutzen essay
edit on 20-3-2012 by SteelToe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by SteelToe
 

Yes, CCN can cause more ice particles to form.
How does that imply that contrails would be larger. I can understand how it would increase the optical depth of a given contrail but I'm not clear on how that would cause a contrail to be "larger". Once the greater number of aerosols is "used" up when the contrail forms, why would the contrail continue to expand?

You're right though, just about every study on any SRM proposal stresses the point that more research is required.

The point of the proposals to increase aerosol levels is not to increase the amount or thickness of contrails. It is the scattering effects which are important. Your own source says this:

The sulfuric acid aerosol floats around in the stratosphere for 1-2 years and reflects sunlight. The level in jet fuel is raised each year to match increased greenhouse gas emissions

www.global-warming-geo-engineering.org...



It's been determined that smaller aerosol particles in clouds have better effects of increasing the albedo.
Are you sure about that? I think you may be talking about proposals regarding low altitude clouds. Here's a proposal to increase the size of cirrus ice crystals to decrease forcing.

Due to the expected dominance of homogeneous freezing nucleation at temperatures below −40 ◦C, it may be possible to decrease cirrus cloud coverage by introducing efficient heterogeneous ice nuclei at these temperatures where the cirrus greenhouse effect is strongest. Due to vapor competition effects, this may result in larger ice crystals with higher fall velocities, which should decrease cirrus coverage and increase OLR, thus cooling surface temperatures.
iopscience.iop.org...
High level clouds increase forcing. The idea is to reduce the amount of high level clouds by seeding them and causing them to precipitate.

That Crutzen editorial hardly "broke the silence". There are quite a large number of articles about SRM which predated it. But are you sure it's talking about enhancing high altitude clouds? The references seen in the first page are talking about changes to low level clouds caused by industrial pollution. Can you find any direct references to stratospheric aerosols being used to enhance high level clouds to reduce forcing?


edit on 3/21/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 




Nature has never defended a cloud,
but when man makes a cloud,
it has to be defended.
That is the question,
why do so many men feel the
need to defend their created clouds?
And how come other men,
cannot question another mans created cloud?


lol, lol, lol...you rip it up.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



High level clouds increase forcing. The idea is to reduce the amount of high level clouds by seeding them and causing them to precipitate.

But that wasn't really the idea when fake clouds were cooling us. That only became the idea when they weren't. And even then that wasn't the real idea. The real idea was that there had to be a reason to change the m.o. for the tropics which weren't responding to natural cirrus abatement.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Thanks for the reply...

Any thoughts on this question?




How do you suppose a geoengineering project's effectiveness will be with a single "application"?

Particularly if it is meant to be used as a solar radiation screen...or whatever it's meant to be?



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Thanks for the reply...

Any thoughts on this question?




How do you suppose a geoengineering project's effectiveness will be with a single "application"?

Particularly if it is meant to be used as a solar radiation screen...or whatever it's meant to be?




The only effective geoengineering is geoengineering that is never attempted.

I also do not support "computer modeling" because it becomes "small scale tests" which become "large scale tests" which become a full scale operation.

This insanity needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. That money should be spent in mitigation if they really believe in anthropomorphic global warming. But I really don't support that as all these projects seem to have two things in common.

1. They benefit the wealthy globalists at the expense of the poor. It is our money being spent.
2. The true goals seem to be centralization of power/wealth by the globalists.

You see this is really about Eugenics:

“Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under another name than eugenics.” - Frederick Osborn


“Eugenics views itself as the fourth leg of the chair of civilization, the other three being a) a thrifty expenditure of natural resources, b) mitigation of environmental pollution, and c) maintenance of a human population not exceeding the planet’s carrying capacity. Eugenics, which can be thought of as human ecology, is thus part and parcel of the environmental movement.”
- John Glad “Future Human Evolution: Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century.”


UNESCO which has been guiding the worlds education is an eugenic organization and pushing global gov't.

"The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background...its education program it can stress the ultimate need for world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization...Political unification in some sort of world government will be required...Tasks for the media division of UNESCO (will be) to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures...to help the emergence of a single world culture....Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable."
- The first director -general of UNESCO Sir Julian Huxley, 1948, "UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy."


Here is the UN paper by UNESCO guiding our education system since the 1970s:


The role of education is to awaken the young to the consciousness
of their responsibilities. It is the coming generations whose
task it will be to strengthen international organizations and
ensure their growth
.


Eugenics is not dead just disguised. And geoengineering/global warming/agenda 21/etc... are just false flags.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Yup! Chemtrails! Nice post!
S & F



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I wanted to add these sources that give a history and some possible techniques.

GEOENGINEERING THE CLIMATE: History and Prospect pdf



4.2.2 Atmospheric Aerosols

Aerosols can increase albedo either directly by optical scattering or indirectly by acting as cloud condensation nuclei that increase the albedo and lifetime of clouds by decreasing the mean droplet size. The modification of climate via alteration of cloud and aerosol properties was first proposed in the 1950s (Section 3). The most famous early proposal was by Budyko, who suggested increasing the albedo to counter CO2-induced climate change by injecting SO2 into the stratosphere where it would mimic the action of large volcanoes on the climate.



THE BENEFITS, RISKS, AND COSTS OF STRATOSPHERIC GEOENGINEERING pdf


The decision to implement geoengineering will require a comparison of its benefits, dangers, and costs to those of other responses to global warming. Here we present a brief review of these factors for geoengineering.

It should be noted that in the three years since Crutzen [2006] and Wigley [2006] suggested that, in light of no progress toward mitigation, geoengineering may be necessary to reduce the most severe impacts of global warming, there has still been no global progress on mitigation. In fact, Mauna Loa data show that the rate of CO2 increase in the atmosphere is actually rising.

However, the change of U.S. administration in 2009 has completely changed the U.S. policy on global warming. In the past eight years, the U.S. has stood in the way of international progress on this issue, but now President Obama is - 3 - planning to lead a global effort toward a mitigation agreement in Copenhagen in December 2009.

If geoengineering is seen as a potential low-cost and easy “solution” to the problem, the public backing toward a mitigation agreement, which will require some short-term dislocations, may be eroded. This paper, therefore, is intended to serve as useful information for that process.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Just for you, Piano.....was thinking of a "How To Use FlightAware" thread to create.

Instead, will use my experience just today, to (hopefully) provide that resource, in this thread.

This PM, @ about 12:44 PDT, I heard a jet pass overhead. It is NOT common, for where I live, as I will show.

Knowing the time delay inherent in FlightAware (hereafter abbreviated as "FA"), I logged on, and searched for the "culprit" jet. At roughly 12:47 PDT, I saw the canditate jet (again, KEEP in mind, it had already passed over, and the data on the "FA" screen was "in the past", as the "FA" data lags).

What I found was Delta Airlines Flight 1554. What I noticed, first, was although it was already WEST of Los Angeles, (KLAX), and out over the ocean, it was still showing the departure/destination tag in the ATC data-block as "KATL/KLAX". (An arrival to KLAX, from the East, would land to the West, as KLAX usually, about 95% of the time, operates in that landing/departure configuration....with ALL departures also on routes Westerly, initially).

I inferred (correctly, as it turns out) that the flight (DAL 1554) had been on normal approach, and then "Gone Around"..the reasons for a"Go-Around" are multi-fold...but, the data-block was clear.

AS WAS its ground track....the one I HEARD fly overhead.

Background: I am on the Palos Verdes Peninsula area of the Greater Los Angeles area. The "normal" routings for air traffic, in order to prevent noise complaints from a rather "well-to-do" areas as PV, keeps airlines well off-shore, when they depart from KLAX, and turn South, and then East.

This is the job of Air Traffic Control, and is something that I know well, as have flown it many, many times.

Taking a look at the "Activity" from "FA" for the area, it is clear to see.

Now.....back to Delta 1554. HERE is the recorded ground track details, for today...21 March, 2012:

First, the FlightAware Home Page, for orientation

Now, the specific "history" details for Delta 1554 on 21 March, 2012


IF you pay close attention to the "overall" map, of the full route (KATL-KLAX), you can Zoom Out, from the link above, then Zoom back In, and scroll horizontally as needed, for more up-close detail, you will note the dashed blue (or, cyan) line (which represents the "filed" Flight Plan Routing), and the green line --- which represents the actual recorded ground track.

Note the detail when you ZOOM in to center KLAX, and make the scale such that you see the obvious ground track. (SCALE of "10KM/5MI")

See it, now? That jet is the one I heard, as it was radar vectored (after it's "Go-Around") back to line up again, for the landing which was accomplished normally later. It passed within my ear-shot....and, as I will show, it was quite easy to hear, because it was at 5,000 feet.

THIS is more detail, you must scroll to the bottom of this page:

FULL Delta 1554 Flight Track Log, 21 March, 2012

(NOTE: The times shown are based on U.S. Eastern times.....I am Pacific, so it is a three-hour difference).


03:36PM 33.9500 -118.3167 248° West 173 199 1,300 -180 Southern California TRACON
03:37PM 33.9333 -118.3667 270° West 180 207 1,900 300 Southern California TRACON
03:38PM 33.9333 -118.4333 248° West 186 214 2,000 240 Southern California TRACON
03:39PM 33.9167 -118.4833 231° Southwest 183 211 2,400 1,020 Southern California TRACON
03:40PM 33.8833 -118.5333 165° South 209 241 4,100 1,260 Southern California TRACON
03:41PM 33.8333 -118.5167 168° South 202 232 5,000 420 Southern California TRACON
03:42PM 33.7667 -118.5000 112° Southeast 198 228 5,000 Southern California TRACON
03:43PM 33.7500 -118.4500 51° Northeast 206 237 5,000 Southern California TRACON
03:44PM 33.7833 -118.4000 51° Northeast 194 223 5,000 Southern California TRACON
03:45PM 33.8167 -118.3500 51° Northeast 197 227 5,000 Southern California TRACON
03:46PM 33.8500 -118.3000 51° Northeast 199 229 5,000 Southern California TRACON
03:47PM 33.8833 -118.2500 68° East 183 211 5,000 Southern California TRACON
03:48PM 33.9000 -118.2000 320° Northwest 195 224 5,000 -900 Southern California TRACON


(You may visit the link< i snipped that bit ( ^ ^ ^ ) above to point out where to look and to study).

Highlights:


03:36PM 33.9500 -118.3167 248° West 173 199 1,300 -180 Southern California TRACON
03:37PM 33.9333 -118.3667 270° West 180 207 1,900 300 Southern California TRACON


Got as low as 1,300 feet, then had to abandon the approach on a fairly routine (it appears) "Go-Around"...this is less than three miles from the airport. These types of occasions are often to to a loss of horizontal separation, between the jet following, and the one in front of it. Either a pilot's mistake, or a Controller's......

The rest, you can see....look at the headings, and the altitudes, and climb rates ETC. AND the times....passed over MY location @ 12:44 PDT (3:44 EDT). You can even use "Google Earth", using the Latitude/Longitude coordinates, and the times listed.....GO AHEAD, check it out!! (Prove I am a liar!!).

My approximate Lat/Long coordinates were: "21 Peninsula Center, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90274"

(Put THAT into Google Maps......it is within a several mile radius of where was). (A minor shopping complex in my vicinity)......Compare, then, using Google Maps (or, GE), to the Lat/Longs shown on "FlightAware".

AND THAT!! Is how to read and interpret the "FlightAware" information!!!!

One last DETAIL!! As I watched this, I saw that many times the screen updated, and "lost" flights, for a few minutes.

BUT!! With subsequent screen re-freshes, the "lost" flights re-appeared. SO, your Opening Post screen-shot is invalid, as to your stated premise.

Sorry, but there is a LOT more to learn, before making such claims as in your OP ...

Study all of this information, and apply it to the Real World.....and use it as an experience to better learn.

Please, continue (everyone) to call me a "liar".

edit on Wed 21 March 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Legislation to Ban Chemtrails gets Huge Public Support [Public Hearing in Long Island]

projectavalon.net... hreaded#post377601


New York's Suffolk County government will held a public hearing on a proposal to ban aerial spraying of aluminum oxide, barium, sulfur, and other salts into the air over the county.

This is that hearing On Dec. 20th 2011, legislators will decide whether to ban geoengineering operations, or this proposed ban will be tabled indefinitely.

Initiated by Cindy Pikoulas and her husband Jim, along with Siobhan Ciresi of Long Island Sky Watch (LISW), with the assistance of chemtrail opponent Rosalind Peterson of Agriculture Defense Coalition, the bill was finalized and proposed by legislator Edward P. Romaine (1st District).

Involved in Suffolk County government since 1989, Romaine is a fiscal conservative who prioritizes saving farmland and protecting the environment. In August, he organized Long Island's first countywide farmers market, along with the Long Island Farm Bureau.


Getting some attention from the public now.

Also we all need to learn from this example.

Anyone can make a difference. Just one or two voices, leads to more, and more awareness.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


I took the photo, then seconds later came in took the screen shot.

It showed the plane right where it should be to be from my photo...



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


So, you now agree that the airplanes in your photos were also represented on Flight Aware??



And, this "Geoengineering -caught in the act?" was not true, then?? You are admitting this, NOW??



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Second hand clouds,
I wonder is there anywhere,
I can go and have a picnic,
and not have to deal with them?



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Unity....those sorts of "Public Hearings" arise due to the concerted efforts of the same type of un-informed people who still think that "chemtrails" are real.

They are constituents, and sometimes they find elected representatives who will listen to their nonsense. Those same Reps are usually as equally ill-informed, of science and reality.

The vast majority of educated, and rational and experienced people see this as an utter waste of time (much as a lot of government, both local and national, turn out to be)....



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Unity....those sorts of "Public Hearings" arise due to the concerted efforts of the same type of un-informed people who still think that "chemtrails" are real.

They are constituents, and sometimes they find elected representatives who will listen to their nonsense. Those same Reps are usually as equally ill-informed, of science and reality.

The vast majority of educated, and rational and experienced people see this as an utter waste of time (much as a lot of government, both local and national, turn out to be)....


Pretty bold statement considering,
you have not been able to prove there is no chemicals in a contrail.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
The contrailers have never shown us at what point they changed,
airplane exhaust, a pollution,
to the term called,
Contrail,
that sounds like condensation of water.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by pianopraze
 


So, you now agree that the airplanes in your photos were also represented on Flight Aware??



And, this "Geoengineering -caught in the act?" was not true, then?? You are admitting this, NOW??


Wow... really??? From nice to this type of backhand tactic?

There is ONE plane making short contrails in the photo at 9:08 and LOTS of others not. When I went in at 9:08 the ONE plane in the photo making short contrails was on radar... All those others were not on the radar... the ones making the long trails.

That was really underhanded. I have said the exact same thing since my OP.

Don't try to twist my words.


edit on 22-3-2012 by pianopraze because: typos


ETA. Guess I should have known better. I was starting to have some nice feelings towards you. Nice backstab.
edit on 22-3-2012 by pianopraze because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
This it what has to stop.
It appears anyone can report pollution on the ground.
but when it comes to airplanes they think they are exempt.
There is no airline compliant on this link.
Why?
They do not want to look down at clouds of pollution,
but don't you dare, claim the same looking up!

www.arb.ca.gov...


Smoking Vehicle To report a vehicle (car, truck or heavy-duty vehicle) which is smoking excessively while in operation on a local street or on the highway.



ARB Environmental Tips/Complaints To report any other air pollution complaint, including open burning, factory emissions, and restaurant emissions, you may email us at the Environmental Tips link above or telephone our General Air Pollution Complaint Hotline at 1-800-952-5588.



edit on 22-3-2012 by Gmoneycricket because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-3-2012 by Gmoneycricket because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   
So anytime a state invites you to report pollution
except for planes or ships, one would, have to wonder why.
I have never seen a line of planes waiting to pass an emissions test.
Have you?
A line of ships?

Maybe that's why they think they can talk down to us.
The Queen Mary got 13 feet to the gallon of oil.
Airplanes speak in tons per hour.
And they claim they are cleaner then our MPG?

edit on 22-3-2012 by Gmoneycricket because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
121
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join