Finally, a swedish Politician speaks on chemtrails in our skies!

page: 8
38
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Seektruthalways1
 


No it's not, because the variable that determines if it lingers or not is the air. You can watch a plane pass through one area that doesn't have much humidity and leave a trail that dissipates in seconds, and then go through an area that has a lot of humidity, and leave a trail that stays for minutes or even hours. The engine and the fuel are the same, but the medium (the air around it) changes, and that's what determines if you get a persistent contrail or not.




posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Seektruthalways1
 


Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
Thats impossible, thats like saying your car can emit 2 types of exhaust from the same engine and same fuel.

On cold mornings, I often see cars leaving a visible 'trail' coming out of the exhaust, yet in the warm afternoons the same cars do not leave a visible trail. Is this impossible, or does this mean that they must be 'chem-cars'? Or could it be that the different atmospheric conditions have changed the visible properties of the exhaust? I think that one of them is a much more likely explanation.


Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
Also from my years from experience and research looking up at the skies and recording, no normal contrail will fan out from a regular passenger liner that isnt carrying aerosol spraying equipment. IF and IF the contrail does linger in the sky for over 10 mins it will not fan out but form a solid line and eventually dissipate like a normal cloud.

Are you saying that your research proves that all the authors of these papers published in journals are wrong?

The results of a pilot study to assess the feasibility of documenting the occurrence of jet contrails over the United States from high-resolution Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) imagery are presented. They are strongly positive, suggesting that 1) contrails can be distinguished from natural cirrus on the imagery; 2) contrails are consistently identifiable; 3) contrails often occur in association with the natural cirrus and frequently spread, and 4) this spreading could extend the accompanying natural cirrus shield.
Jet Contrails and Cirrus Cloud: A Feasibility Study Employing High-Resolution Satellite Imagery


In this paper the amount of additional cirrus induced from spreading contrails in humid air is estimated from the direct correlation between observed cirrus cover derived with suitable methods from METEOSAT data and aviation flight density reported by EUROCONTROL at high spatial and temporal resolution from June 22 to July 27, 1998 and September 27 to October 21, 2000.
Aircraft induced contrail cirrus over Europe


Cirrus coverage resulting from young linear contrails can be estimated with 1-km infrared satellite data (Mannstein et al. 1999), but it is difficult to assess the full impact of contrails because they often spread into non-linear, natural-looking cirrus clouds (Minnis et al. 1998).
Spreading of isolated contrails during the 2001 air traffic shutdown

Forgive me for not simply accepting your observations and research as undeniable fact. Indeed, my own observations indicate that it is possible for "2 types of exhaust" (or more) to be emitted from vehicles.


Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
Chemtrails clouds that form in a day that has no cloud cover is artificial. If there was the right atmospheric pressure, temperature, and humidity, there would be regular cloud cover. And if you tried to form clouds in a cloudless day with a jet by water vapor exhaust from a jet, it would dissipate due to the lack of correct conditions.

Has your research led you to understand what an ice supersaturated region of the atmosphere is? If not, perhaps this could help start. It shows that persistent contrails can, and do, persist in cloud-free skies.


For ice crystal formation high ice supersaturation (i.e. relative humidities over ice larger then 100%) are needed; this is confirmed by many measurements (e.g. Koop et al., 2000; DeMott et al., 2003). Thus, the existence of cloud-free air masses in the status of ice supersaturation (so-called ice supersaturated regions, ISSRs) is clear from a theoretical point of view and it was also proven by a variety of measurement techniques.
Ice supersaturation in the tropopause region


Persistent contrail formation requires air that is ice-supersaturated (Brewer, 1946). Ice-supersaturated air is often free of visible clouds (Sassen, 1997) because the supersaturation is too small for ice particle nucleation to occur (Heymsfield et al., 1998b).
Contrail Occurrence and Persistence and Impact of Aircraft Exhaust on Cirrus

I'm not in any way saying that you're deliberately lying. But much like the Swedish politician, I think that you've simply accepted claims by chemtrail proponents without fully validating their claims. I hope the information provided helps to expand your understanding of the topic.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   
I always enjoy con-trailers,
and the way they describe the white lines (Contrails /Chemicals) in the sky,
as waste products of profit.
The whole argument as they describe it,
comes down to a need for profit
and the people we are dumping this waste product on,
better enjoy it,
or we will call them ignorant,
in the name of science,
for profit.
edit on 26-9-2012 by Rudy2shoes because: I could



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Rudy2shoes
 


Well I guess you could make contrails while running an airline at a loss too......but you probably wouldn't make them for long.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Rudy2shoes
 


Well I guess you could make contrails while running an airline at a loss too......but you probably wouldn't make them for long.


In America that is how they do it,
I thought American Airlines just send out layoff/termination letters to 11,000 employees
for this reorganization/bankruptcy filling coming up.

But claim only 4,000 will not be able to assist in operations anymore.
Its another 4,000 that may feel different when they look up at the sky.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Rudy2shoes
 


American Airlines is kind of a special case. Several US airlines have declared bankruptcy over the last 10 years, but they've all so far come out of Chapter 11, and are making nice profits, and are merging into one giant airline that is making lots of money.

American on the other hand is operating old aircraft that you can't make money on, and until recently refused to buy new planes. They mailed out 11,000 layoff notices, but said less than 4,400 would be furloughed.
edit on 9/26/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Sometime in the future people will look back at primitive air travel,
compare it to the covered wagons of the past,
that just left ruts in the environment.
I am sure in the past there was discussions about the waste,
left by modern wagon travel.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


So your saying a passenger jet, can make 2 types of contrails out of the same fuel, from the same engines? Thats impossible, thats like saying your car can emit 2 types of exhaust from the same engine and same fuel. Also from my years from experience and research looking up at the skies and recording, no normal contrail will fan out from a regular passenger liner that isnt carrying aerosol spraying equipment. IF and IF the contrail does linger in the sky for over 10 mins it will not fan out but form a solid line and eventually dissipate like a normal cloud.

There is definitely some other exhaust from another source, thats what I am speaking of. Chemtrails clouds that form in a day that has no cloud cover is artificial. If there was the right atmospheric pressure, temperature, and humidity, there would be regular cloud cover. And if you tried to form clouds in a cloudless day with a jet by water vapor exhaust from a jet, it would dissipate due to the lack of correct conditions.
edit on 26-9-2012 by Seektruthalways1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-9-2012 by Seektruthalways1 because: (no reason given)


And we ask again ... what aerosol spraying equipment?

You're referencing it, so you must have seen it, right?



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Rudy2shoes
 


Well I guess you could make contrails while running an airline at a loss too......but you probably wouldn't make them for long.


In America that is how they do it,
I thought American Airlines just send out layoff/termination letters to 11,000 employees
for this reorganization/bankruptcy filling coming up.


Yep - note that bit about bankruptcy........



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


ARE YOU BLIND???
Do you see any of those along the coast... at all!!?

Can you READ
you say"the wind can blow them into a grid "
I told you a dozen times We SAW them make the GRID!
edit on 27-9-2012 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 





If you are going to get all fixated on che trails a least cross reference your source and don't just sallow EVERYTHING you read.


You believe everything that is so called 'proof' against chemtrails, even using the word debunked in some of your replies to Char, and yet any opposing references are simply shown a link in your favor. That is not debunking, nor is it proof that there are no chemtrails. Truth is you cannot prove anything anymore than a believer can.
Yours is an opinion based on information you have read/researched and no different than the opposing opinion [based off of research as well].




Thats how secret it is.You see, people familiar with aviation can spot it straight away when someone who isn't is talking crap.

That's just showing disrespect for anothers opinion.
_________________________________________________________

This is not worth arguing over or showing disrespect to others based on our opinions. I could show dozens of links leading me to my opinion on this subject, but my time is limited sitting in this chair and I've learned to choose my battles wisely. This isn't one I'm willing to get my panties in a twist over-not because it's not important, but because it's not something I can ever prove.

I take no issue with others who form opposing opinions to mine, but I do know that sometimes just letting my thoughts known have to be enough. Some people might agree or disagree, some may listen, and then there are those who won't even care to know if their own opinion might be wrong.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by RobinB022
You believe everything that is so called 'proof' against chemtrails, even using the word debunked in some of your replies to Char,

Can you quote where waynos said this? I don't think that they have used that word once in this thread...


Originally posted by RobinB022
and yet any opposing references are simply shown a link in your favor. That is not debunking, nor is it proof that there are no chemtrails.

If a link contains factual information that conclusively shows that an opposing view was wrong, then it is debunking. I agree that it isn't proof that there are no chemtrails, as it simply shows that the information presented as evidence for chemtrails is wrong. That doesn't mean there are no chemtrails, but it certainly doesn't prove that there are chemtrails either.


Originally posted by RobinB022
Truth is you cannot prove anything anymore than a believer can. Yours is an opinion based on information you have read/researched and no different than the opposing opinion [based off of research as well].

The truth is that waynos, amongst others, conclusively showed that information Char-Lee provided was wrong (eg. the French KC-135 tanker). Therefore, they did prove something more than a believer. You could try to refute their information, but I think you would have a hard time doing so.

Obviously, not all research is equal. Take for example, the post I replied to above. The poster claimed that their research proved that a)contrails don't spread, and b)contrails can't form where there are no clouds. A little more research would show that both these claims are false, based on an extensive wealth of knowledge and observations from studies by meteorologists and scientists. If no one can refute the studies that were posted (and there are many more), it would be logical to conclude that the opinion that contrails can form in cloud free skies and spread is different from someone claiming that they can't.

I'm not saying that chemtrails don't exist, and I never have. But it's thanks to posters such as waynos who provide accurate information, that we can eliminate a lot of the supposed evidence put forth by those who claim chemtrails are undeniable fact. It is sad that some will simply ignore this information. But as you said, there are those who won't even care to know if their own opinion might be wrong.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes
I am sure in the past there was discussions about the waste,
left by modern wagon travel.


I seriously doubt it.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by RobinB022
reply to post by waynos

You believe everything that is so called 'proof' against chemtrails, even using the word debunked in some of your replies to Char, and yet any opposing references are simply shown a link in your favor. That is not debunking, nor is it proof that there are no chemtrails. Truth is you cannot prove anything anymore than a believer can.
Yours is an opinion based on information you have read/researched and no different than the opposing opinion [based off of research as well].


I cannot prove that there are no such things as chemtrails, the possibility of such activity is why I came here, I can only comment on the evidence that is presented. My comment about some believers being too far up their own arse is an opinion I have formed, the French AF KC-135 tanker is a fact. The former may be incorrect and unfair, maybe, the latter is cast iron and easily provable. I'll scan the magazine and post the pic if you like, do you see the difference?

I look at all evidence with an open mind, some I've never seen before and has looked interesting, some is absolutely genuine and fascinating, such as the geo-engineering stuff posted on (I think) page 2 of the thread. The trouble I have is when people try to connect this stuff with the "chemtrails" we see in the sky. I've not yet seen anything at all that does this, it is pure assumption. Where is the research here?

Then when I see evidence that is clearly bull poo, I will say so. On what basis did the website make the claim that plane was a chemtrail sprayer?





Thats how secret it is.You see, people familiar with aviation can spot it straight away when someone who isn't is talking crap.

That's just showing disrespect for anothers opinion.


Who's opinion? The website author that posted that story and pictures in order to fool people into thinking that he'd found a chemtrail plane WAS talking crap, or did you think it was directed to char-lee, who merely posted the link? I wouldn't do that.
edit on 27-9-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptChaos
Strange how on a conspiracy website, any thread that even mentions chemtrails brings out the naysayers, in force, and immediately. Seems everyone on this well known conspiracy site thinks chemtrails are nonsense.

Think about this for a second. The logical steps are soooo easy hence the frustration by people who can think:
Let's assume they are real:
1. Chemicals are being sprayed in the air which affect us.
2. Those organising this know how dangerous the chemicals are
3. Those same people (and all relatives) MUST, ABSOLUTELY MUST remain indoors or underground and grow or manufacture their own food sources, including drinkable water away from the normal environment (which is poisoned)
5. Given how many people this would involve : manufacturers of chemicals, engineers to load civil airlines, pilots to do the spraying, politicians to allow it etc etc. The numbers involved are huge.

This is completely and totally ludicrous. Nonsense beyond comprehension unless you can show me where they are all hiding and where all the food production plants are.



Methinks thou doth protest too much.

It's called frustration at how ignorant you have to be to continue to believe this stuff.


Not saying I believe this stuff one way or another, since here in Mexico I have never seen the type of skies I see pictures of all the time. I was thinking of it yesterday as I watched two jets. I was lolling on the beach, enjoying the 98 percent humidity, which supposedly is what causes the long lasting contrails. Two jets left pronounced contrails. They dissipated after about ten minutes, just like normal.

It's not humidty that allows contrails to persist but humidity, temperature and pressure (ie the height of the aircraft).

This means you can see a very short lived contrail AND a very long lived contrail without moving one inch from your point of observation. You can cherry pick your observations (as you have) to back your claim!



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


At that particular time there were no flights along the coast, but as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, a contrail can be seen from miles away. There was also a link to a real time flight tracking site that showed several flights going directly over your area that you ignored.

As for the grid, of course it forms a grid. Air travel in the US is directed just like the interstate system where you have flights going east to west, crossing flights going north to south. Guess what happens when that occurs? You get a grid.

It always amazes me how chemtrail believers accuse us of being disrespectful, but then turn around and jump all over us and accuse us of being blind, not reading, stupid etc.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimIrie
reply to post by Bodhi911
 


Just posted the interview with her in a new thread to have another discussion about her and what she said...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



Thanks.


Ive been reading this thread and to no surprise, some people still dont have the perception that chemtrails are real. But those people dont concern me much. Im happy that the ones who do have the perception appriciates the information.

I dont know how many years it will take before these projects are stopped, but Im hoping that brave people such as Pernilla here are shortening that time as much as possible.


Originally posted by Zaphod58
It always amazes me how chemtrail believers accuse us of being disrespectful, but then turn around and jump all over us and accuse us of being blind, not reading, stupid etc.


You wont get any of that from me. I understand that you dont see it. Dont worry about it.



Originally posted by yorkshirelad
3. Those same people (and all relatives) MUST, ABSOLUTELY MUST remain indoors or underground and grow or manufacture their own food sources, including drinkable water away from the normal environment (which is poisoned)


Why? Do you see people run from other people smoking? Or avoid drinking alcohol and other drugs that also kills you slowly?

Personally I believe the foremost reason for chemtrails is to control the weather, and I believe that the side effects of people being poisoned dont really concern the people who do this. Yes, it can affect them as well, but the risk of these people being affected is small. We dont see millions of people being affected. We see hundreds or maybe thousands, with sympthoms that cant be connected to this since chemtrails are not admitted to exist.

edit on 27-9-2012 by Bodhi911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes
I am sure in the past there was discussions about the waste,
left by modern wagon travel.


I seriously doubt it.


Sadly so i think...

Nearly one in ten who set off on the Oregon Trail did not survive. The two biggest causes of death were disease and accidents. The disease with the worst reputation was Asiatic cholera, known as the "unseen destroyer." Cholera crept silently, caused by unsanitary conditions: people camped amid garbage left by previous partiesies, picked up the disease, and then went about spreading it, themselves.

www.octa-trails.org...
edit on 27-9-2012 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


At that particular time there were no flights along the coast, but as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, a contrail can be seen from miles away. There was also a link to a real time flight tracking site that showed several flights going directly over your area that you ignored.

As for the grid, of course it forms a grid. Air travel in the US is directed just like the interstate system where you have flights going east to west, crossing flights going north to south. Guess what happens when that occurs? You get a grid.

It always amazes me how chemtrail believers accuse us of being disrespectful, but then turn around and jump all over us and accuse us of being blind, not reading, stupid etc.


I am going to try this one more time.

We watched two aircraft...one making lines and turning around to make another East by West. The second flying North and South turning around at the Smith River area and coming back on the next line.

My husband does not believe in conspiracies of any kind, he watched this also and now believes they (the gov. since these were military jets ) are doing "something".

We can see the sky here we are not in the city. To the west is the ocean, to the East a high ridge of mountains.

We have no regular contrails here maybe because it is less windy to fly further inland, I don't know. Every now and then we will see a contrail off shore flying North/South, this is unusual enough for all the people to stop and watch.

I am sorry I called you blind but either you are deliberately playing obtuse or want to make me stressed. Why paste a photo that shows no flight anywhere near us? What was the purpose.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


At that particular time there were no flights along the coast, but as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, a contrail can be seen from miles away. There was also a link to a real time flight tracking site that showed several flights going directly over your area that you ignored.

As for the grid, of course it forms a grid. Air travel in the US is directed just like the interstate system where you have flights going east to west, crossing flights going north to south. Guess what happens when that occurs? You get a grid.

It always amazes me how chemtrail believers accuse us of being disrespectful, but then turn around and jump all over us and accuse us of being blind, not reading, stupid etc.


I am going to try this one more time.

We watched two aircraft...one making lines and turning around to make another East by West. The second flying North and South turning around at the Smith River area and coming back on the next line.

My husband does not believe in conspiracies of any kind, he watched this also and now believes they (the gov. since these were military jets ) are doing "something".

We can see the sky here we are not in the city. To the west is the ocean, to the East a high ridge of mountains.

We have no regular contrails here maybe because it is less windy to fly further inland, I don't know. Every now and then we will see a contrail off shore flying North/South, this is unusual enough for all the people to stop and watch.

I am sorry I called you blind but either you are deliberately playing obtuse or want to make me stressed. Why paste a photo that shows no flight anywhere near us? What was the purpose.



I'm going to take a wild leap here and go along with your observation that these planes were flying in a grid.

Now you take the next step. Tell us what proves to you these planes were military. Tell us what makes you think they were "spraying" something.





new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join