Are these Chemtrails?

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by tsurfer2000h

 

Did you miss this from your link?

www.criticalpast.com...

Chemical Warfare Smoke Curtain seen.

Help me out here...what does this link refute?

It refutes that it is from WW2, it refutes that it is anything like the supposed chemtrails that have supposedly being happening since the late 1990's.

I'm surprised you couldn't figure that much!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

It refutes that it is from WW2, it refutes that it is anything like the supposed chemtrails that have supposedly being happening since the late 1990's.

I see. Makes no bit of never mind to me whether it's from WWI or II or III or anytime before or in between or after. Why should it?

It looks exactly like the chemtrail clouds we all were talking about not 6-7-8 months ago or less. The threads that were named something like '...cloud tops touching earth...' etc. Looked exactly like this. In fact, I, myself, viewed one of these experiments in real time from my location. Sorry you missed it. And 'curtain' is an apt name because it was like a curtain drawn on a specific section of sky.

True, we've moved on to bigger and greater things - monster dust storms and all the wonderful modifications that originally modifying for drought allow.

I'm surprised you couldn't figure that much!

Are you now? I think you just wanted to get in a dig. Better luck next time.

reply to post by luxordelphi

The threads that were named something like '...cloud tops touching earth...' etc.

I can't believe I missed a thread with a title like that.
Perhaps you misinterpreted. Not that you would ever do anything like that of course.

reply to post by Thorazine

Please deal with the facts

Happy to as soon as you cough some up.

Your claim is a fallacy.

Calling something a name doesn't make it so.

There aren't enough radiosondes anywhere in near enough proximity to each other to account for humidity/lack of humidity levels in the isolated yet neighborly spots of atmosphere involved in the morse-code-like series of dashes across the sky made by a chemtrailing segmented drop/spurt plane. You got nothing. You got no evidence. You got assumptions.

reply to post by Phage


Cloud Tops Dropping Closer to Earth, NASA Satellite Finds

There were others but I can't remember anything in the title and the search thing is for the birds.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Thorazine

 

Please deal with the facts

Happy to as soon as you cough some up.[/quoet]

I think the idea was that you should provide some of your own.....relevant ones.....some day...some how....

Your claim is a fallacy.

Calling something a name doesn't make it so. [/quoet]

...[cough]chemtrails[/cough]

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Thorazine

 

Please deal with the facts

Happy to as soon as you cough some up.

Your claim is a fallacy.

Calling something a name doesn't make it so.

There aren't enough radiosondes anywhere in near enough proximity to each other to account for humidity/lack of humidity levels in the isolated yet neighborly spots of atmosphere involved in the morse-code-like series of dashes across the sky made by a chemtrailing segmented drop/spurt plane. You got nothing. You got no evidence. You got assumptions.

Fail.

It is evidenced by the FACT that clouds have gaps, form in different parts and altitudes of the atmosphere...and indeed, the FACT that clouds can also take a "morse-code-like" appearance that the temps and humidity necessary for cloud - and contrail- formation can vary.

As per your avoidance tactics- you failed to answer the questions as to why clouds have gaps?

Your "logic" fails you- the idea that there are not enough radiosonde data stations to "account" for changes in the atmosphere bear NO relevance to the fact that the atmosphere is fluid and can change quite rapidly...such as evidenced in the rapid changes in clouds. This is not assumption. These are facts.

More facts?

You point to Evergreen and their supertanker with its ability to do segmented drops as evidence of "chemtrails"....when IN FACT- they only have one plane- which clearly cannot account for the all the segmented "chemtrails" supposedly viewed each day...Moreover, it does not emit trails out of its engines, does not release its load at high altitudes and does not leave a persistent trail.

These are all FACTS which you will refuse to acknowledge and choose instead some other hyperbole which will do nothing to further the discussion but only serve as conspiracy spam.

Here is a neat tool...

for anyone who wants to see how changes in atmospheric conditions can change the nature of a contrail - play with this applet- you can change the conditions while the plane is in flight to see what it does to the contrail- learn how gaps are created:


profhorn.aos.wisc.edu...

reply to post by luxordelphi

Originally posted by luxordelphi
Calling something a name doesn't make it so.

A prime example being...

Originally posted by luxordelphi
But your 'science' is like dogma which persists in the face of contrary observation.

So you attempt to use 'science' to claim that contrail persistence is rare (it's not, based on our actual knowledge of the atmosphere and observation), but once it's shown that you've failed miserably, you claim all the science is wrong. You have nothing to back up this claim other than your own ignorance.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
There aren't enough radiosondes anywhere in near enough proximity to each other to account for humidity/lack of humidity levels in the isolated yet neighborly spots of atmosphere involved in the morse-code-like series of dashes across the sky made by a chemtrailing segmented drop/spurt plane. You got nothing. You got no evidence. You got assumptions.

Since you seem to be ignoring what you have been told repeatedly, I'll try to make it more obvious for you.

CLOUDS!

You have made the assumption that there are no pockets of humidity, when the evidence presented clearly refutes this. Are you still going to claim that there is no such thing as pockets of humidity? I would not have though it possible, but your ignorance is reaching new heights in this thread so it probably shouldn't be too suprising if you do.

To the OP, this is why you look at all the information, instead of simply believing posters like this one who repeatedly spread misinformation and mislead others with their erroneous claims, and refuse to acknowledge they're wrong when they're repeatedly shown to be so, while claiming everyone else is wrong without ever providing evidence to back them up.

If Contrails are real why do they, have to be defended?
If Chemtrails are a false, why do they have to be debunked?
Has this argument of what men see in the sky,
been going on ever since the first men looked up?
Are we only allowed to sit around campfires,
and not discuss our opinion of what we see
in the sky?

I have only asked to sit with those at the fire,
I have brought no buckets of water, that some call facts,
trying to extinguish the questions that men and women, have asked,
since they have looked up,
while sitting around the campfire.

reply to post by luxordelphi

Oh, I see. You translate a lower (of a few meters) average cloud top level to "cloud tops touching earth".

Silly me to think you might have misinterpreted something, or distorted it beyond recognition.

When we look at contrail/chemtrails
and whittle it,
as facts,
on little sticks,
that we add to fire,
there is no history,
of what we call facts.
When I look up at the smoke of my own little fire,
I understand its concept, and my own desire.
But when I see trails of smoke from some unknown fire.
my thoughts switch to fear, and abandon desire.

reply to post by Rudy2shoes

Contrails, persistent and otherwise, are not smoke.
But please, continue to blow as you see fit.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


You're a sly one, Gaul. (cough) outrageously persistent contrails (cough)

reply to post by Curious and Concerned


The clouds in the photo you put up don't look like morse code to me. Is it me or is it you?

Since you seem to be ignoring what you have been told repeatedly...

Listen to yourself. '...ignoring what you have been told repeatedly...'

Lighten up. If you're seeking the truth, you're amongst friends.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Rudy2shoes

 

Contrails, persistent and otherwise, are not smoke.
But please, continue to blow as you see fit.

edit on 8/20/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I for a fact,
know you have sought shelter in the desert.
But claim knowledge of science,
but ignore human facts.
I have wander through the village of this man and his facts,
they all stare at the sky and tell us, what they claim are facts.

We may no longer need the priests of the past,
to tell us what we see when we look to our sky's.
But with contrails,
we can plainly see,
there are many,
that claim to be priests,
and tell us what we see.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

You're a sly one, Gaul. (cough) outrageously persistent contrails (cough)

Quite- you saying they are outrageously persistent does not make them so - you are doing well.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
[

Why did the pilot wear heated gear? Because his cabin wasn't heated.

Yes by all means have a little fun but you see this misconception bandied about on 'Chemtrail/Contrail' threads. The misconception that some people can't understand that the temperature at ground level, even during Summer, is not the same at 30,000 feet. Aircraft such as B-17s, B-24, Lancasters etc were unpressurised. All year round the Aircrew had to fly in cold weather gear due to the extremes of temperatures at heights up to 30,000 feet. Guns and other equipment froze even during the Summer months. The constant freezing temperatures when operating at these heights, even in summer, was a major problem. Contrails formed all year round and were another problem to contend with.

The final aspect of physiological problems experienced by crews involves adaptation to the extreme cold of flying at 25-30,000 feet during their long missions. Here again, many unanticipated problems had to be overcome. Minus 30 to 50 degree temperatures were quite normal over northern Europe at 25,000 feet,

Another difficulty was contrails forming behind the aircraft at certain unpredictable levels in the upper atmosphere. These contrails immediately gave away the position and direction of a bomber to any hostile interceptor and the Fortress had to either climb higher or descend to avoid the contrail level. The inability to avoid the trail was the reason for the failure of a prestigious raid on Berlin by three Fortresses on July 23, 1941.

Physiological Problems of Bomber Crews in the Eigth Air Force during WWII