ChemTrails over Michigan

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 
For arguments sake I will change the "I know" part to "I believe", I have seen, on numerous occasions, planes leaving massive "trails" while flying ,some seeming to shoot straight up, while other planes that appear to be flying to a similarly perceivable altitude leaving a smaller "temporary" contrail. while I am not a "scientist", I whole heartedly "believe" that they are spraying something.




posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by MagicWand67
 


If you think foam bubbles are the same effect as a contrail then you clearly don't know what you are talking about. Where has it ever been demonstrated that the substances you described would produce a long lasting trail? Your claim betrays the fact that you are ignorant of the reasons contrails last for hours, no surprise really.

Your arrogant manner is really quite amusing in light of the total lack of knowledge you yourself dispay, of course, to paraphrase a famous quote, "you don't know what you don't know". The funny thing is you genuinely seem to feel the same way about people who actually GET how contrails behave in the atmosphere
edit on 3-9-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by IsawWHATtheyDID
 


It is understandable why someone who isn't really familiar with aviation might draw that conclusion from that kind of observation. But are you able to conceive that that cannot judge a distance by sight alone from six or more miles away with any accuracy? For that is how far above your head the planes are flying.

This means that you can't tell if a plane is 1ft or 1,000ft higher. Though you can confirm that by tracking flights online.

Can you also conceive that the atmosphere is very fluid and that conditions vary from one area to the next. This is especially relevant to contrail formation and persistence. Learning about this sort of stuff would go a long way to your understanding of what you are looking at.

But apart from all that, what led you to believe they were spraying in the first place?
edit on 3-9-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by waynos
 


Another typical, lazy skeptic.


Will believe any lie as long as it supports their opinions.

Then when asked for proof. They some how try to flip it around.



Oh mighty wizard how does one prove there is nothing there?


No one has flipped anything around as many of us are waiting for some unification in the chemtrail believers crowd so we can get a clear definition ( not chaff, Geo-engineering or crop dusting) of what chemtrails are and then provide evidence that can be verified that these chemtrails exist, not youtube vids or people who think they have some type of superpowers with their eyes and can tell just by seeing a trail in the sky. If a person can tell the difference between two trails in the sky just by looking at them why haven't these people making these claims also told us what chemicals are being used if they can tell the difference, If one is chemtrail and the other is contrail and your only tool is your eyes how were you able to apply a chemistry lab to your eyes to analyze these chemicals, or are you an Alien, or a Terminator style robot with all kind of gadets and one is being able to analyze a substance from 10km away?

I just dont get it if its real there wouldnt be so many varying contradictions in ideas thrown out by people trying make others believe chemtrails are real, same goes for many topics discussed of the fringe nature.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by InhaleExhale
 


Agreed, the fact that the skeptics explanation is consistent and the conspiracists explanations vary so wildly from post to post is quite revealing in itself. If chemtrails are the truth then why are here so many different versions?

Here's something else to ponder. A certain number of people on here have taken up a stance that the chemicals are secretly loaded in an operation that the crews are unaware of, this is often posted in response to the question of why pilots would spray heir own friends families and colleagues.

Well, on a recent photographic flight over Rotherham United's New York Stadium on a hot humid day on which the windsock was hanging limply by the airfield perimeter, our pilot asked my friend and I if we would take our cameras and the lenses we intended to use for the shoot but leave our bags behind as every ounce mattered and the extra weight of them could make a difference as to whether we got off or not. Two camera bags!

Now, scale this up to a jetliner carrying thousands of gallons of chemical that the pilot is unaware of and hopefully you can see why the notion is nonsense.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by IsawWHATtheyDID
reply to post by Uncinus
 
For arguments sake I will change the "I know" part to "I believe", I have seen, on numerous occasions, planes leaving massive "trails" while flying ,some seeming to shoot straight up, while other planes that appear to be flying to a similarly perceivable altitude leaving a smaller "temporary" contrail. while I am not a "scientist", I whole heartedly "believe" that they are spraying something.



Planes don't "shoot straight up" unless they are small aerobatic planes or jet fighters. Pretty much every plane you ever see leaving a contrail is flying level, or at less than 5 degrees from level. The "straight up" is just an optical illusion cause by planes flying straight towards you.

Consider this image, all the lines here are perfectly level, yet some go "straight up", or at steep angles.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
What is the purpose of this geo-engineering?

Weather control?

Blue beam?

Solar flare prevention?

De population?



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 
I have have witnessed planes not leaving a trail until what appeared to me to "switch" something on, and then leave massive trails. while this might be all do to "atmospheric" conditions, I still believe that someone is up to something nefarious. the way that the sky will have a dirty hazy look, while they are "spraying" does not look right at all. now if this is all due to "atmospheric" conditions, why dont all planes leave them every day? if there is that big of a difference in conditions , such a little distance apart. I still choose to believe they are up to something.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
The reason planes don't do it all the time is precisely because the conditions vary. I've tracked flights and taken photographs myself when I was looking into the theory.

In lower, warmer air no plane will leave a contrail. At cruising altitudes for civil aircraft between 28,000 and 38,000 ft it is always freezing cold, minus 20 or colder, and so all aircraft here will leave trails. Here it is the relative humidity (RH) that makes the difference. When it is low the frozen trail will quickly sublimate and the trail will disappear. If it is high and the air is already full of moisture and cannot take any more, the frozen trail has nowhere to go and hangs around until that condition changes.

A plane seeming to turn a trail on or off is simply flying out of one condition into the other, no switch flicking is required for that effect.

By all means be suspicious and on the look out, that's how wrong doing always gets found out, all I'm trying to say in my long winded way is to try and understand as fully as possible exactly WHAT you are observing so that you are equipped to identify nefarious activity when it happens and you don't fall into the same trap as so many on here of just mis-identifying regular contrails which CAN persist, CAN stop-start and which pretty much HAVE to form grids due to the nature of air traffic. In my experience you will always see a grid when contrails persist. And yes, I have photos of that too.


That's why I ask what the reason is for believing, my personal theory is that people look on the Internet to explain something that looks odd to them in the sky, find chemtrails and that's that.

If chemtrails are evidenced entirely from what the trail looks like, then I SHOULD have seen one by now. I have seen grids, stop-start trails, long persisting trails that spread out, in fact ALL the classic descriptions we get on here, over a 40 year fascination with flying, but I still haven't seen a trail that looks out of place based on what I know contrails do and have known since long before chemtrails were first claimed.

If people are ONLY convinced about chemtrails because they don't think that contrails should look like any of those things, then I believe they are making a wrong call.

When someone then tells me I am a closed minded sheeple, unable to absorb facts, or words to that effect (not you, it's happened a few times from believers not just the imbeciles that have done it in this thread) when i dare to disagree with them because I did my OWN research and used my own knowledge and experience and combined it with all the independant sources I have access to, rather than simply take their word for it, or swallow the rambling nonsense linked on some nutjob website, it convinces me even more strongly that the whole Chemtrail malarkey is a scam.

Here is an example image from my own research where I identified aircraft to eliminate "secret military" flights from the trails, the data was from flightradar24, the photo is my own.

edit on 3-9-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by IsawWHATtheyDID
 


Here you go this should answer all questions you have or may not have about chemtrails..
It also explains the on/off chemtrail (aka contrails) that you say you have seen.



Enjoy....



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
 


could you please list the errors on contrailscience.com?

I am very interested in this subject and would hate to be learning incorrect information.

Thanks in advance for your help.


no need go read that post again
the one where the owner admits to being a no-nothing
with a 150 miles flight time [ i imagine its a few miles more nowadays]
it's just opinions backed by delusions

or were you just trying to get me to waste my time in a sort of GO-TO loop?

fail




Fail? Cool. So I guess you won't be listing any inaccuracies?
I mean, it's cool to sound like you are a really smart person and claim someone is lying, but when you cannot prove what you say, you kind of look like an idiot. Don't be that guy.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


'dude, i've little enough patience for suffering fools as it is

certainly none for somebody pretending to be one

so "Don't be that guy"

toodles


why you all bumping a old thread the op long abandoned?
anything new in geo,ufo,ancient civ, or metaphysics
i havent seen 'cause its been bumped of the page?

oh wait,
never mind



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 
thanks for the educated explanation, its apparent you know way more than me. I will still unfortunatley have the "what if" stuck in my head. like if all the chemtrails I see are just normal condensation from the exhaust "what if" they are also releasing some unknown agent ? paranoid? no suspicious? yes



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by IsawWHATtheyDID
 


Me too, its one of the reasons I'm here. You know, 'just in case'. That's my motivation for debunking, if something does happen, why should it be hidden by all the bunk. Believers should welcome debunkers, when something cannot be debunked BINGO!



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


today wednesday sept 12th over lansing mi, the sky is full of chemtrails, i took a drive before work and they are laying them one next to the other. lansing does have an airport, but they are not flying planes out one every couple of minutes, I also witnessed 2 planes flying opposite directions within in what could not have been more than a couple miles apart, from where i was it looked like a couple hundred feet, if it is said that those are "traffic lanes" where the planes are supposed to fly i call b.s., as anal as the faa is about air space, i cannot see them flying planes that close together with all of those "exhaust fumes" hindering sight. there are also other planes in the sky not leaving any trails. i am sticking to my conclusion that they are up to something nefarious.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by IsawWHATtheyDID
reply to post by waynos
 


today wednesday sept 12th over lansing mi, the sky is full of chemtrails, i took a drive before work and they are laying them one next to the other. lansing does have an airport, but they are not flying planes out one every couple of minutes, I also witnessed 2 planes flying opposite directions within in what could not have been more than a couple miles apart, from where i was it looked like a couple hundred feet, if it is said that those are "traffic lanes" where the planes are supposed to fly i call b.s., as anal as the faa is about air space, i cannot see them flying planes that close together with all of those "exhaust fumes" hindering sight. there are also other planes in the sky not leaving any trails. i am sticking to my conclusion that they are up to something nefarious.


Instead of making wildly uneducated guesses about the horizontal or vertical distance between two planes, do some research and find out what it actually was. The information is out there (as many have demonstrated across countless chemtrail vs contrail threads on ATS).

Find out what altitude each of your planes is at, where they came from, where they are going, etc. You are not capable of accurately judging the distance between two planes at cruise altitude, so educate yourself instead of operating at dropout level.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by flyswatter
 


it wasnt a wildly uneducated guess, Im pretty sure I said what couldnt have been more than a couple miles but that it appeared to me to be a couple hundred feet. despite my "wildly uneducated guess" . I also have been reading quite a bit on the chemtrails vs contrails threads, and I find just as many posts to reaffirm my beliefs as I do to de-bunk them. im sticking to my original conclusion. thanks anyway.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by IsawWHATtheyDID
reply to post by flyswatter
 


it wasnt a wildly uneducated guess, Im pretty sure I said what couldnt have been more than a couple miles but that it appeared to me to be a couple hundred feet. despite my "wildly uneducated guess" . I also have been reading quite a bit on the chemtrails vs contrails threads, and I find just as many posts to reaffirm my beliefs as I do to de-bunk them. im sticking to my original conclusion. thanks anyway.


So you would rather promote ignorance rather than do a simple check of flightradar24 to get the factual information? You certainly have the right to do just that, but I'm not sure why you would choose to be purposefully ignorant.

You make wild guesses on distances and have no proof of anything having to do with chemtrails. Given those facts, why should any of us put faith in anything that you post on here?

First step - next time you have a question about a flight that you think is "spraying," note your location, the approximate location of the plane, and the time of the day. Take that information and check flightradar24.

Even making that wee bit of effort will get you a hell of a lot more respect and credibility, and people might actually pay attention to the substance of your posts.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   
if these planes are indeed miles apart, why dont the trails seem different in thickness from my line of sight? i didnt come on here attacking your point of view and have offered what i seen and what i concluded. the fact that your the one who is riled up, says enough in itself. i have read and seen plenty of info to support my belief, and i stand by them. if you read the whole thread you would have seen me change "I know" into "i believe", just so i didnt seem like i was "factual" in my belief. you have not even given me any info that will change that. as far as checking out the radar and flight info i choose ,for now ,to continue with my stance. if this is so normal, why does it not happen everyday? why does the change in weather from morning to night not disipate the amount of chemtrails ? I choose to believe that something is up.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by IsawWHATtheyDID
if these planes are indeed miles apart, why dont the trails seem different in thickness from my line of sight? i didnt come on here attacking your point of view and have offered what i seen and what i concluded. the fact that your the one who is riled up, says enough in itself. i have read and seen plenty of info to support my belief, and i stand by them. if you read the whole thread you would have seen me change "I know" into "i believe", just so i didnt seem like i was "factual" in my belief. you have not even given me any info that will change that. as far as checking out the radar and flight info i choose ,for now ,to continue with my stance. if this is so normal, why does it not happen everyday? why does the change in weather from morning to night not disipate the amount of chemtrails ? I choose to believe that something is up.


I dont know how far apart these planes were, and I dont have the ability to make that kind of determination from the ground anyway. The best that I can do without aid from something like flightradar24 is say "hey, those look close" or "hey, those dont look close." If I was to sit here and say that I think they were only a few hundred feet apart, I'd expect to be slaughtered. And rightfully so.

Its not your point of view that I am attacking, its the general acceptance of bad information in the face of factual information being available. Even though I believe you are wrong, I'm not trying to change your stance or your point of view. What I am doing is trying to point you in the direction of a way that you can actually find supporting and/or dissenting information about what you are trying to judge - in this case, flight information. If you get on there and find information that would support your claim, that would be nothing but a boost to your argument and viewpoint. If the information does not support your claim, then at least you are more educated on the matter, all without having to rely on simple opinion of others. Being right or wrong ... either way you will still have a net gain of credibility by using available and reliable sources.

As far as why it doesnt happen every day, I cant tell you for sure, but there are numerous possibilities. More or less air traffic on a given day, different flights being at different cruise altitudes, different weather patterns ... all of those are possibilities. And the change of weather from morning to night as we see it on the ground is different than the changes that take place at 25,000+ feet in the air. Regardless of the time of day, its damn cold up there, thats for sure





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join