Want to know when they will be spraying in your area? Read on!

Originally posted by luxordelphi
[And I'm saying that forecasting haze caused by chemtrailing craft has nothing to do with meteorology as a science of weather

I completely agree - it has to do with beleif in the mythology of chemtrailing

....but, instead, has to do with the dispatch of craft.

and since no such "craft" have ever been shown to exist it is easy to predict that no haze is ever caused by "chemtrailing craft" - QED - well done!

[ So if your meteorologist is accurately forecasting haze caused by craft, they are actually reporting on pollution i.e. toxic jet emissions.

so why is ther no haze every otehr day when aircraft generate exactly teh same amount of pollutin by flying?

And, manipulatively, calling it haze in an effort to downplay the toxic aspects.

They call it haze because it is haze.

Smog is smog whether it's in the upper atmosphere or at ground level or colored brown or white or blue. It's bad regardless of altitude. It's not natural - it's caused by aircraft.

cirrus cloud is not smog whether caused by aircraft or not.

There's nothing urban about chemtrails. They've been reported in suburbs and wilderness areas. I, myself, first noticed them in an area without flight paths and without an airport - a wilderness area.

and yet no-one can identify "chemtrails" other than by the long debunked but oft repeated falisy that htey supposedly last longer.

Observation is not If you think chemtrails are a myth - you need to get out more. There's plenty of observational evidence for chemtrails. There is no observational evidence for contrails a la WWII.

Even chemtrail "professionals" disagree with you on that - this is Michael J Murphy, producer of both "WITWATS" movies, saying that you cannot observe the difference betwen a chemtrail and a persistant contrail - the only way to know the difference is to check their chemical composition:



this is Rosalind Peterson saying chemtrails do not exist:

Originally posted by luxordelphi
And I'm saying that forecasting haze caused by chemtrailing craft has nothing to do with meteorology as a science of weather but, instead, has to do with the dispatch of craft. So if your meteorologist is accurately forecasting haze caused by craft, they are actually reporting on pollution i.e. toxic jet emissions.

And you know this because you are not a meteorologist, and when a meteorologist (someone who studies the weather - NOT a US TV weather presenter!) says otherwise then it means that they are obviously lying. Right?



Fact is, it's very easy for a meterorologist to predict when "chemtrails" will appear and when they will not. Yet, commercial airflights vary little at all between when "chemtrails" appear and when they do not. Odd.

So is it all down to predictable atmospheric conditions? Or are hundreds of thousands of people in on a conspiracy to make hazy skies? And is it a heriditary position? After all, it's been going on for decades .......

Though one thought: has anyone else noted that belief in chemtrails only started after chemtrails were observed? Maybe what they are spraying is mind altering drugs that make you think you what you see is something other than what it is? Worth considering I think ......

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by apex

 

Now I haven't been formally trained in weather science, but if you'd care to explain why people funded by this organisation would lie about how meteorology works (because it forms a fairly large part of this book), please tell me.

Once upon a time, in WWII, there were massive aircraft maneuvers which included dog fights, flak, smoke etc. in winter skies over europe. Contrails, true contrails, were in evidence and were unwanted because the enemy could easily spot your plane even at altitude. Since that time, in the 1940's, over 60 years ago, technology has been developed to eliminate the contrail.

Yep - or you could jsut fly at a different height and avoid them.

But why bother - contrails are just contrails & there was no incentive to spend money on complicated and corrosive systems to suppress them, nor to burn even more fuel to fly at lower altitudes to avoid them.

Contrails, in those days, persisted for, perhaps, 15 minutes at the outside.

And your evidence to support that statement is what? Missing??

Fast forward to 2012. Today, what is being called a contrail, persists for hours, eventually turning into fake cirrus (called cirrus aviaticus) and, on a daily basis, causing a blue sky to become completely overcast.

that is something that was known to happen in 1940 -

The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud over the countryside.

antoine de Saint Exuperry, in "Flight to Arras" 1942, still available on Amazon.

These are chemtrails.

contrails are still contrails even if there are a lot more of them.

The deliberate manipulation of the atmosphere. Geoengineering.

nope. Geoengineering is a deliberate attempt to change the climate - not the atmosphere - although many proposed methods of doing it involve changing hte atmosphere.

And making contrails through air travel is not a deliberate attempt to change teh cliate OR teh atmosphere in eth first place.

Further, this persistence takes place at altitudes and temperatures and particle saturation levels not previously conducive to contrail formation.

More baseless assertions - how about you provide the evidence that you must have in order to make such a claim??

It takes place without weather fronts.

Yep - so what?

Weather fronts are an obvious case where the conditiosn aer often right for contrails - but they are by no means the only conditions!

Forecasting haze, caused by aircraft, is not a weather forecast.

Indeed - but it seems that knowing the weather makes it a lot easier.

In order to forecast haze, caused by aircraft, one needs to know about the dispatch of chemtrailing craft: how many, where, when.

Or, more reliably, the cnditions in teh upper atmosphere (weather!), and the presence or otherwise of many flights by airliners - which do actually exist .....unlike chemtrails.

reply to post by luxordelphi

In order to forecast haze, caused by aircraft, one needs to know about the dispatch of chemtrailing craft: how many, where, when.

So only chemtrailing planes cause hazy skies?

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by Lurkenstein
I'm a skygazer.

So frequently I see huge grids of chemtrails being sprayed over where I live (Brooklyn), then I watch them expand into thin clouds, then a heavy overcast rolls in, then rain. Many, many times.

Before Sandy hit, before the snow storm yesterday (although it was just rain here), etc.

And what you're saying here is expected. The weather conditions most suitable for contrail formation are usually ahead of weather fronts. This is no secret.

So then, how is it that as I'm witnessing a chemtrail being sprayed, I can also see a plane at nearly the same distance leaving a contrail behind it not even remotely comparable in length to the chemtrail? (Forgive me if this has been brought up, as I have not had the time to read every post after my own.)

Originally posted by Lurkenstein

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by Lurkenstein
I'm a skygazer.

So frequently I see huge grids of chemtrails being sprayed over where I live (Brooklyn), then I watch them expand into thin clouds, then a heavy overcast rolls in, then rain. Many, many times.

Before Sandy hit, before the snow storm yesterday (although it was just rain here), etc.

And what you're saying here is expected. The weather conditions most suitable for contrail formation are usually ahead of weather fronts. This is no secret.

So then, how is it that as I'm witnessing a chemtrail being sprayed, I can also see a plane at nearly the same distance leaving a contrail behind it not even remotely comparable in length to the chemtrail? (Forgive me if this has been brought up, as I have not had the time to read every post after my own.)

Contrails can persist for many hours, so how long it lingers isnt exactly something that can be used to try and differentiate.

One plane having a lengthy and persisting contrail and one not having the same could be for a variety of reasons - different conditions at the differing altitude for each of the planes, different planes with different engines, etc. Others here can certainly explain things a bit better than I can, but I'm sure you understand what I'm trying to say.

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by Lurkenstein

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by Lurkenstein
I'm a skygazer.

So frequently I see huge grids of chemtrails being sprayed over where I live (Brooklyn), then I watch them expand into thin clouds, then a heavy overcast rolls in, then rain. Many, many times.

Before Sandy hit, before the snow storm yesterday (although it was just rain here), etc.

And what you're saying here is expected. The weather conditions most suitable for contrail formation are usually ahead of weather fronts. This is no secret.

So then, how is it that as I'm witnessing a chemtrail being sprayed, I can also see a plane at nearly the same distance leaving a contrail behind it not even remotely comparable in length to the chemtrail? (Forgive me if this has been brought up, as I have not had the time to read every post after my own.)

Contrails can persist for many hours, so how long it lingers isnt exactly something that can be used to try and differentiate.

One plane having a lengthy and persisting contrail and one not having the same could be for a variety of reasons - different conditions at the differing altitude for each of the planes, different planes with different engines, etc. Others here can certainly explain things a bit better than I can, but I'm sure you understand what I'm trying to say.

Yes, generally it's that the two planes are a different altitudes. It only takes a few hundred feet difference between contrail and no-contrail, or persistent and non-persistent. See:
Why do some planes leave trails but others don't

Originally posted by Lurkenstein
So then, how is it that as I'm witnessing a chemtrail being sprayed, I can also see a plane at nearly the same distance leaving a contrail behind it not even remotely comparable in length to the chemtrail? (Forgive me if this has been brought up, as I have not had the time to read every post after my own.)

A couple of previous posts have mentioned differnt conditions - here is a stark illustration of how conditions can affect different aircraft -



the main different condition in this case is the engines fitted - on the left is an A340 with more-or-less modern high bypass ratio turbofans, on the right a Boeing 707 with much older low-bypas-ratio turbofans.

these 2 aircraft were flown together to study the effect of propulsive efficiency on contrail formation.

If you are technically minded then the study can be downloaded from here - it is a 211kb pdf file.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

The difference in power plants would not affect persistence.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

The difference in power plants would not affect persistence.

If they aren't producing a contrail in the first place then it might be a little bit important

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Yeah.
But that wasn't the question.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Yeah.
But that wasn't the question.

And i wasn't specifically answering a question about persistance - but providing an illustration of how different conditions can affect spectacularly contrail generation - you don't get much more difference than between generates a contrail" and "doesnt generate a contrail".

contrail generation and persistance is not an exactly known science*, and IMO such an illustration is important to show just how much affect a change in a single condition (the engine) can cause.

* - we know some major parameters that affect generation and persistance, but we usually know al lteh conditions throught an entier contrail and how they are affecting it at that point.

Here ya go, some nice clear sky pics of northern Luzon, Philippines. We have been having good weather this year.... Unfortunately you will have to wait for a picture of an airplane passing with their contrail.. only a couple of them pass by a day and I don't always hear them, and I'm not going to stare at the sky waiting for a plane to pass, sorry =) I'm about to go mountain biking so maybe I will see one then.

It's just after 12pm here now. Taken from my backyard.








Maybe someone finds this useful =b

reply to post by waynos


Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed the pics...and yes was surprised by the "last vestiges of blue" 'because' of what it is!

∞LOVE
mayallsoulsbefree∞

reply to post by Philippines


Very Glad you like the photo!
Took them with the intent of sharing in just the right form.
Having the island expeience as well, can say they definitly occured in HI, but guessing that due to Kona winds etc. they could not stagnate and disperse in the same manner over landlocked areas of mainland!
Be Aware, Be Alive ~

∞LOVE
mayallsoulsbefree∞

reply to post by Lurkenstein

So then, how is it that as I'm witnessing a chemtrail being sprayed, I can also see a plane at nearly the same distance leaving a contrail behind it not even remotely comparable in length to the chemtrail? (Forgive me if this has been brought up, as I have not had the time to read every post after my own.)

Have you ever played in the ocean or a lake?
Cold in one spot but step a few feet to the side and it's warm. Just like the atmosphere.

I think one reason people can't grasp contrails is they are not cognazent about the conditions where airliners fly.
We are talking -40 to -60F. How many of us have ever walked out the door into something like that?
Not to mention air pressure far lower than any human can survive for more than a few minutes.
It's nothing like boiling water in your kitchen. What your common experience tells you should happen doesn't apply up there.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Lurkenstein

 

So then, how is it that as I'm witnessing a chemtrail being sprayed, I can also see a plane at nearly the same distance leaving a contrail behind it not even remotely comparable in length to the chemtrail? (Forgive me if this has been brought up, as I have not had the time to read every post after my own.)

Have you ever played in the ocean or a lake?
Cold in one spot but step a few feet to the side and it's warm. Just like the atmosphere.

I think one reason people can't grasp contrails is they are not cognazent about the conditions where airliners fly.
We are talking -40 to -60F. How many of us have ever walked out the door into something like that?
Not to mention air pressure far lower than any human can survive for more than a few minutes.
It's nothing like boiling water in your kitchen. What your common experience tells you should happen doesn't apply up there.

I think what you're talking about is the equivalent of "thermoclines" (if that is the right term) in scuba diving, though maybe a different term for the atmosphere.

I'm no expert, but i believe the atmosphere is like water, and there are different layers of the atmosphere at different elevations, with each one having a different temperature and pressure depending on its elevation.

To say that you can step in water on one spot and be cold, then step a few to the left/right and its warm -- there are too many variables to make a proper analogy... perhaps. At that shallow of a level there are too many factors about temperature -- urine, spring water, sunny day/cloudy day, water movement/stagnation, etc.

Maybe the atmosphere is 'patchy' temperatures like a shallow end of a lake.. but airplanes we see flying over are usually cruising at a constant altitude, where the air is consistent and predictable, not turbulent.

The issue I see are with images. I lived in the USA and the "contrails" in the USA most likely "stuck" and then dissipated into a "haze" that I saw another member post.

Being said, we have been having clear blue skies here and the 2 airplanes I did spot did not have any trail behind it, I only knew it was there because of the sound and then had to try and spot it without any contrail as an easy reference.

Maybe because of my latitude/location I don't see the "chemtrail" sticking effect like I do in the USA. I DO see contrails every once in awhile, but they don't last very long at all.

Or maybe it could be that the Philippines is an insignificant country and TPTB don't care or haven't started chemtrails here.

Originally posted by Philippines

Maybe the atmosphere is 'patchy' temperatures like a shallow end of a lake.. but airplanes we see flying over are usually cruising at a constant altitude, where the air is consistent and predictable, not turbulent.

"Clear air turblence"??

But the air does not have to be turbulent to be different over different areas - conditions can change for various reasons without enough turbulence to be noticed.

Or maybe it could be that the Philippines is an insignificant country and TPTB don't care or haven't started chemtrails here.

nope!!

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Philippines

Maybe the atmosphere is 'patchy' temperatures like a shallow end of a lake.. but airplanes we see flying over are usually cruising at a constant altitude, where the air is consistent and predictable, not turbulent.

"Clear air turblence"??

But the air does not have to be turbulent to be different over different areas - conditions can change for various reasons without enough turbulence to be noticed.

Or maybe it could be that the Philippines is an insignificant country and TPTB don't care or haven't started chemtrails here.

nope!!

Cool, thanks for the video. I lived in Manila for about 5 years before moving where I am now. At the time in Manila I didn't see chemtrail activity (wasn't looking for it all the time though.)

In the video, it looks like the airplane is leaving a contrail because towards the end of the film you can see the trail disappear far behind the plane.

However, there does look to be an existing chemtrail left by some other airplane not shown; the "fat" dissipated contrail looking thing that I have seen in the USA.

Thanks again for the video. It probably does happen here then, but not as much compared to the USA, and not that I have seen in the remote place I'm in now.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by apex

 

Now I haven't been formally trained in weather science, but if you'd care to explain why people funded by this organisation would lie about how meteorology works (because it forms a fairly large part of this book), please tell me.

Once upon a time, in WWII, there were massive aircraft maneuvers which included dog fights, flak, smoke etc. in winter skies over europe. Contrails, true contrails, were in evidence and were unwanted because the enemy could easily spot your plane even at altitude. Since that time, in the 1940's, over 60 years ago, technology has been developed to eliminate the contrail. Contrails, in those days, persisted for, perhaps, 15 minutes at the outside.

Fast forward to 2012. Today, what is being called a contrail, persists for hours, eventually turning into fake cirrus (called cirrus aviaticus) and, on a daily basis, causing a blue sky to become completely overcast. These are chemtrails. The deliberate manipulation of the atmosphere. Geoengineering.

Further, this persistence takes place at altitudes and temperatures and particle saturation levels not previously conducive to contrail formation. It takes place without weather fronts.

Forecasting haze, caused by aircraft, is not a weather forecast. In order to forecast haze, caused by aircraft, one needs to know about the dispatch of chemtrailing craft: how many, where, when.

Excellent post, very straight forward and readable to anyone here.
Star for that.

Regards, Iwinder