Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Contrail / Chemtrail. The debate ends here.

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Contrail / Chemtrail. The debate ends here.


The problem with the chemtrail argument is that it has so many theories, explanations and different conspiracies relating to how, what, when, why and where; I will not get into them because I am sure you know them.

This prompts many people to flat out say “chemtrails are not real”.
You should find these exact words on any chemtrail related thread on ATS.

That statement is simply not true.




Chemtrails [kem-tray-els]
Noun
1. Fumes, vapours, chemicals, substances or agents which are sprayed or left by an aircraft in the air which do not evaporate immediately or form clouds.




This does exist; it is an observable thing when contrails become chemtrails as they linger in the air for a long time and go on to form clouds.

The word chemtrail does not imply a theory as to why these things are going on.

Simply saying this is a chemtrail does not mean it is a government conspiracy or whatever else some may believe, it just means that it is a observable substance being left by an aircraft in the form of a contrail but does not evaporate immediately like water vapour would (the substance that makes up a contrail).

So the next time someone makes a thread asking if this picture or video is a chemtrail then explain to that person that if the substance has not evaporated for a considerable amount of time, goes on to form a cloud or does not behave like a typical contrail that it is a chemtrail.
edit on 30-3-2012 by IgnorantSpecies because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Yes, but people aren't arguing whether or not there's a trail left behind as that's blatantly obvious, but rather a conspiracy type chemtrail. So.. Pointless thread is pointless thread.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by JELLYWAX
Yes, but people aren't arguing whether or not there's a trail left behind as that's blatantly obvious, but rather a conspiracy type chemtrail. So.. Pointless thread is pointless thread.
Incorrect, I constantly see people flat out denying that chemtrails exist.
This has nothing to do with the conspiracy behind it, but the notion that there is no such thing.

Which is not true.

Not a pointless thread at all. Your comment is a pointless comment.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Can you provide the source for your definition. That's not what people are usually talking about when they talk about "chemtrails".


The chemtrail conspiracy theory holds that some trails left by aircraft are actually chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed at high altitudes for purposes undisclosed to the general public in clandestine programs directed by government officials.[1] This theory is not accepted by the scientific community, which states that they are just normal contrails, and that there is no scientific evidence supporting the chemtrail theory.


The term chemtrail is derived from "chemical trail", in the similar fashion that contrail is a portmanteau of condensation trail. It does not refer to other forms of aerial spraying such as crop dusting, cloud seeding, skywriting, or aerial firefighting.[7] The term specifically refers to aerial trails allegedly caused by the systematic high-altitude release of chemical substances not found in ordinary contrails, resulting in the appearance of characteristic sky tracks.


Chemtrails, coming from "chemical trails" in the same fashion that contrail comes from "condensation trail" is a term coined to suggest that contrails are formed by something other than a natural process of engine exhaust hitting the cold air in the atmosphere. Proponents of chemtrails characterize these chemical trails as streams that persist for hours, and by their criss-crossing, grid-like patterns, or parallel stripes which eventually blend to form large clouds. Proponents view the presence of visible color spectra in the streams, unusual concentrations of sky tracks in a single area, or lingering tracks left by unmarked or military airplanes flying in atypical altitudes or locations as markers of chemtrails

en.wikipedia.org...



chemtrail 32 up, 20 down

A nickname for contrail clouds left behind by planes that refers to a theory. It is believed that these contrails serve as pollution, reducing the earth surface's exposure to sunlight. This causes global cooling.

The theory though, is that there was and possibly stil is a government conspiracy, in which they are flying military planes that purposely create these chemtrails to cause global cooling (slowing down or lessening the effects of global warming).

www.urbandictionary.com...

"Chemtrails" are persistent contrails, clouds of ice crystals.

It's interesting though, that there has been a "movement" afoot to redefine a "chemtrail" as any exhaust trail. So, with this new definition cars leave "chemtrails", boats leave "chemtrails", even cows leave "chemtrails".


edit on 3/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

A chemtrail is a residue left by an aircraft which does not behave like a contrail, i.e. does not evaporate or forms a cloud.

Whats your problem?

It is an observable thing.

The word chemtrail DOES NOT imply a theory as to why, only what.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage it feels like it's been almost 5 yrs I've been debating you about chemtrails.
Are you still insisting everything is on the up & up concerning the lingering atmospheric milky white pollution addition to our skies over the past 10-15 yrs?

They've (military) have admitted to doing it without our consent many times before. Nothing has changed from the days when the CIA openly experimented on civilians, if anything, the government has grown 1000X more in corruption since then. Something isn't copacetic with our skies. these aren't natural nor are the skies I grew up looking at.

"They" aren't going to publish what is in the experimental phases.
We'll find out later, when they're done "testing".



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnorantSpecies
 

Depending on atmospheric conditions a contrail can:
a) Not form at all
b) Form and sublimate quickly
c) Form and persist for an extended period of time.
d) Form, persist, spread and form a cloud.

If you are saying that the formation "chemtrails" depend upon atmospheric conditions you are correct. But why bother calling them "chemtrails" and attach all that conspiracy baggage to it?

Do you have a source for your (re)definition?
edit on 3/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


Are you still insisting everything is on the up & up concerning the lingering atmospheric milky white pollution addition to our skies over the past 10-15 yrs?


Longer than that.
From 1919:

The second German sighting occurred on May 9, 1919, when a pilot flying over Berlin at about 26,000 feet noticed the generation of a cloud stream that extended for about forty miles behind his plane. This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.
www.questia.com...

From 1970:

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent conditions exist from 25,000 to 40,000ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.

journals.ametsoc.org...



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by IgnorantSpecies
 

Depending on atmospheric conditions a contrail can:
a) Not form at all
b) Form and sublimate quickly
c) Form and persist for an extended period of time.
d) Form, persist, spread and form a cloud.

If you are saying that the formation "chemtrails" depend upon atmospheric conditions you are correct. But why bother calling them "chemtrails" and attach all that conspiracy baggage to it?
Because the word chemtrail shouldn't have that baggage.
It is just a word, there are a million theories behind the notion it cannot possibly describe them all.

Chemtrails have been observed, we know this.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   
To clarify, this is about people who flat out deny that chemtrails are a real thing.
Regardless of their theory as to why.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnorantSpecies
 


Because the word chemtrail shouldn't have that baggage.

But it does. See the post from JibbyJedi above.


Chemtrails have been observed, we know this.

Contrails have been observed. Ever since aircraft flew high enough to produce them.



To clarify, this is about people who flat out deny that chemtrails are a real thing.
Regardless of their theory as to why.

You mean that there is something that makes "chemtrails" inherently different from contrails, other than the atmospheric conditions which cause them to form?
edit on 3/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by IgnorantSpecies
 


Because the word chemtrail shouldn't have that baggage.

But it does. See the post from JibbyJedi above.


Chemtrails have been observed, we know this.

Contrails have been observed. Ever since aircraft flew high enough to produce them.

It is perceived to, but it actually doesn't.

Chemtrails have been observed low in the sky



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnorantSpecies
 


Chemtrails have been observed low in the sky

So have contrails.
Nice video here (starting at about 4:00 in particular). Persistent contrail in Antarctica at ground level.

edit on 3/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnorantSpecies

....That statement is simply not true.

Chemtrails [kem-tray-els]
Noun
1. Fumes, vapours, chemicals, substances or agents which are sprayed or left by an aircraft in the air which do not evaporate immediately or form clouds.


Can you provide a source for this definition?



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I think they are ALL
chem trails.
only the ones that dont last are ok.

you just get bullied to belive it!



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
I just know from an article released by some government agency in response to people's concerns that they were experimenting with Geo-engeneering. The article stated that the chemicals were harmless. That means that "Chemtrails" were being used for experimentation but doesn't mean it is to the extent that people are saying they are seeing. I myself think it's not that big of a program at this point but I could be wrong.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


I just know from an article released by some government agency in response to people's concerns that they were experimenting with Geo-engeneering.

Interesting. I don't suppose you can provide a link?
edit on 3/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnorantSpecies
 



This prompts many people to flat out say “chemtrails are not real”.
You should find these exact words on any chemtrail related thread on ATS.

That statement is simply not true.


Right. What they should be saying is, "Those long white lines in the sky are NEVER 'chemtrails,' they are ALWAYS 'contrails,' and there ever are chemicals being sprayed, they are invisible."



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Well I guess the title of this thread is spot on... the debate sure does seem to be ended in here.




posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I'm not good at saving things I read. I see what they say and fit it in my mind and that's it. I'm studying the Parasympathetic nervous system right now trying to figure if the chemicals that they are spraying that affect the bees could tie to the mascaric sensors of humans too. They can tie to the acetylcholine/ nicotine sensors. I've created a spiderweb search off the Bee article on Sciencedaily.com today. I read of the bees losing their way from incecticides a year ago already and the chemical silently removed from the market, but it appears that there are more. The nicotine sensors control our minds ability to think clearly with acetyl choline as the proper chemical. Nicotine ties to it well but the pesticide may mess it up. It has no limited life and it doesn't effect our health but may interfere with our ability to find our way home from the bar.
I'll see if I can refind that article. I think it was released somewhere near Oregon if I remember right.





new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join