So Maybe There ARE Chemtrails...

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
Great example of a normal contrail and lingering chemtrail.

The contrail disappears almost right away.

You would expect lower in the atmosphere, there would be less ice crystal formation and/or they would disappear even more quickly at higher temperatures.

Yet in this video, the lower "trail" lingers much longer than the higher one, exactly the opposite you would expect according to the chemtrail debunkers if these were only contrails.

There is no doubt chemtrails exist. The only question is why. Don't be caught up in Orwellian distractions.

Seriously you are assuming the persistent contrail is lower is that because it looks that way because it's wider how long was it there had it spread out, is it lower you cant tell, you also can't tell the temperature or humidity at the level of the trails so the video is worthless!

reply to post by wmd_2008


Thanks for your opinion.

Well, we obviously have one jet that is high up making a contrail, can we agree on that? Let's say it is around a cruising altitude of between 30,000ft to 35,000ft, or about 10,000 meters or about 10km?

Then we have another set of "trails". So you think this pair of trails could be higher than the obvious contrail being made by the jet? If they are higher, they must be huge!

I think it is obvious they are lower, we just don't know how much lower.

Anyway, here is a chart where you can see the relation between temperature and altitude.

So in this video, if the contrails are forming at about the 10km mark, it is quite cold there. For the contrails to persist lower down it must be colder down there or have much different humidity, but the overall humidity of an area is roughly the same, and as you can see from the chart the atmosphere heats up rapidly as altitude decrease.

Hence, we are left with the inescapable conclusion that the lower "trails" are comprised of a different substance from the upper contrail, comprised of something more than just water vapor.

Let's move on to the why.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

Hence, we are left with the inescapable conclusion that the lower "trails" are comprised of a different substance from the upper contrail, comprised of something more than just water vapor.

And how do you come up with this inescapable conclusion that they are different just by looking at the video?

Also not every plane produces the same size contrails which is evident in the video you posted.

In fact here are a few examples...

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

If they are higher, they must be huge!

Why not? Contrails spread. It would have been nice if the youtuber had provided video of the old contrails being produced. I wonder why he didn't.

but the overall humidity of an area is roughly the same, and as you can see from the chart the atmosphere heats up rapidly as altitude decrease.

Two fallacies. Humidity varies with altitude just as temperature does. While there is a general trend for temperatures to fall with altitude, it is often not the case. There can be a layer of warmer, dryer air above a colder, wetter layer. It's called an inversion.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


In the lower pair of chemtrails the detail is quite clear, but in the higher contrail the detail is hard to discern, that is usually what happens when something is near or far.

So why do you think chemtrails exist?

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

that is usually what happens when something is near or far.

It also happens when something is larger than something else.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

So why do you think chemtrails exist?

I can say that there is no evidence to actually prove the reality of chemtrails, but now why do you think chemtrails exist?

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

So in this video, if the contrails are forming at about the 10km mark, it is quite cold there. For the contrails to persist lower down it must be colder down there or have much different humidity, but the overall humidity of an area is roughly the same, .......

there is no reason why that needs to be the case. Humidity can vary massively over short changes of altitude

This site has balloon soundings from the UK - the dashed blue line on any of them shows the dew point temperature - the temperature at which moisture will begin to condense out of air. teh solid blue line is het wet bulb temperature.

the gap between the 2 indicates humidity - if they are the same then humidity is 100% - the further apart they are the less the himidity.

You will see on almost all of those charts that there are sharp changes in humidity at various altitudes.

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

So in this video, if the contrails are forming at about the 10km mark, it is quite cold there. For the contrails to persist lower down it must be colder down there or have much different humidity, but the overall humidity of an area is roughly the same, and as you can see from the chart the atmosphere heats up rapidly as altitude decrease.

The relative humidity can vary greatly over a short distance. This photo illustrates it quite nicely, the clear bits are below 100% and the cloud bits are over 100%




Hi BTW.

reply to post by mrthumpy

Hi.

And here's a case of a layer of air with 100% humidity laying below a layer of less than 100% humidity. With that humid layer not covering the entire valley.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mrthumpy

 

Hi.

And here's a case of a layer of air with 100% humidity laying below a layer of less than 100% humidity. With that humid layer not covering the entire valley.

I don't understand why you defend chemtrail threads with such ferocity when you admittedly don't even live in areas where you observe the phenomena. It's like when I asked you to defend the point your water isn't fluoridated, after asking me the same question, only to edit your post and ignore my question. Funny how you manipulate info to suit your platform.

reply to post by Philippines

I'm not the topic.
Are you?

reply to post by Philippines


Why pick on phage? No debunkers have observed chemtrails. That's kind of the point

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


But you have no context with which to judge which trail is higher, you are assuming the one that looks largest is closer to you. Given that the reason people think contrails are chemtrails is because they persist and spread, promoting further cirrus formation as they go, there is clearly no reason this assumption can be relied upon. Do you see that?

For example, if you were taking the same approach and you saw two twin jets, a 777 and a 737, flying side by side from directly below you would assume the 737 was higher simply because the 777 dwarfs it (the 737 fuselage has a smaller diameter than one of the 777's engine nacelles). It would be a trick of perception, as are spreading trails when fresh ones are being left.

reply to post by waynos


Which is the nearest?



Of course on the ground it's easy, but in the air, side by side, would you think the A380 was lower than the 737?

Here is a picture of my own, it also shows a wide spreading trail (the ID is for the plane that left it) with a much narrower, newer trail crossing it. If you look at the extreme upper left you can see where this trail starts to pass below the much wider one, which therefore cannot be lower.

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Philippines

 

Why pick on phage? No debunkers have observed chemtrails. That's kind of the point

You're right. Phage, my apologies. I am still upset over that fluoride in the water issue being edited without reason.. Anyways, you know what I'm talking about and that is not this thread. My apologies.

With all the supposed knowledge of how these things are formed, it is beyond amazing that nothing has been done to find a way to eliminate them with some kind of emissions system.. or something thereof.

Is it not reasonable to ask why certain planes are emitting while others do not.

Contrail enthusiasts are an odd bunch, they appear to have no problem with them covering the skies and blotting out the sky all over the planet.....

And they are adamant that nothing can be done about it, and that noone is doing ANY of it on purpose.

reply to post by ParasuvO

And they are adamant that nothing can be done about it, and that noone is doing ANY of it on purpose.

Something can be done about it. Planes could fly at lower altitudes or try to reroute around conditions that are conducive to contrail formation. Either option means burning more fuel which means additional CO2 and costs.

Or, they could just quit flying.

Originally posted by ParasuvO
With all the supposed knowledge of how these things are formed, it is beyond amazing that nothing has been done to find a way to eliminate them with some kind of emissions system.. or something thereof.

Is it not reasonable to ask why certain planes are emitting while others do not.

Contrail enthusiasts are an odd bunch, they appear to have no problem with them covering the skies and blotting out the sky all over the planet.....

And they are adamant that nothing can be done about it, and that noone is doing ANY of it on purpose.

Things can be done, just none of them are worth doing, on balance. See:
Contrail Avoidance and Mitigation Techniques

reply to post by ParasuvO

Contrail enthusiasts are an odd bunch, they appear to have no problem with them covering the skies and blotting out the sky all over the planet.

They are an odd bunch indeed.

The amount of time they spend posting in these threads leads me to the understanding that they have absolutely no time left for other activities in life. They must have no interests in things like a job, a personal life, hobbies, outdoor activities and recreation.

It appears they would prefer to spend all of their waking hours arguing on the internet. Debating about a topic they say doesn't exist with people who they believe are ignorant, crazy and/or are perpetuating some kind of a hoax.

They are are an odd bunch indeed.