BUSTED: Summertime Chemtra, errr "Lingering Contrails"

page: 16
12
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by awake1234
 





20yrs ago the skies didnt exhibit this phenomenon.


Really?

Then you may want to do a bit of reading...

www.457thbombgroup.org...

There are photos from WWII that show these lines in the sky and it became a problem for those planes flying missions.





So to say the sky didn't exhibit this 20yrs ago is a fallacy as it has been shown it did.




posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by awake1234
....20yrs ago the skies didnt exhibit this phenomenon....


If by this, you mean that 20 years ago there were fewer persistent contrails in the sky, then I would agree. But that is because today there are more high-altitude flights than 20 years ago, and the new high-efficiency/high-bypass engines that began to be used by the airline industry 15 tears ago are more apt to cause a thicker contrail.


However, if when you sa "20yrs ago the skies didnt exhibit this phenomenon", you mean that there were NO persistent contrails 20 years ago, then you would be wrong...

Persistent contrails have been produced by planes ever since the beginning of high-altitude flight, and were a well-known atmospheric phenomenon throughout the "jet-age" of the 1950s and 60s. Here is a book published in 1963 that makes mention of persistent contrails creating clouds:


In the link below is a 1972 research paper which discusses persistent contrails:
Measurements of the Growth of the Ice Budget in a Persisting Contrail
(This links directly to a PDF file)

Here is an excerpt:


... If sufficient air carrier traffic exists, an entire overcast of contrail cirrus may develop and persist for hours with rapid growth in ice budget in individual contrails...



From a personal standpoint, I remember the existence of persistent contrails in the past. I grew up near a very rural area in the 1970s, and I remember (even then) farmers discussing how the rise of air travel has give rise to cloudier days -- because of persistent contrails that would spread out to become a cirrus cloud.

edit on 9/9/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Regardless of what old photographs are dug up ( which can be manipulated) or what peoples memories are of the sky when they were younger ( which can be wrong or selective), ye cannae change the laws of physics. Anyone arguing that the trails didn't behave like this 20
years ago needs to come up with a reason why they couldn't just like anyone saying trails today should dissipate after x amount of time needs to explain that too



posted on Sep, 9 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I remember sky-spanning persistent contrails from the 1960's - I can even name the year they started - 1968, when Boeing 737's started flying domestic routes in New Zealand and I lived under one of them - the destinations were 200 miles either side, and the contrails from the flight in one direction would often still be there when the contrails from the return flight came back an hour later.

And then a few years after that I started working as a mechanic on those same jets!



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Nice picture...really...but not comparable to the after-effects, which are the actual object, of the photograph shared in my previous post.
Thanks



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Nice investigation...but the persistence of contrails is not in question, now or 20yrs ago...the remnants filling the sky, for over half a day, for several days, and through inconsistent temperature patterns is.
Thanks



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by awake1234
 


And you've taken temperature readings at altitude to tell the temperatures are inconsistent right?



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


To state what is ignorant assumes that you have knowledge in the first place...not stating this personally...just as a redundancy to be phrased on a conspiracy web-site...even a little.
Thanks



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   

awake1234
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 

Nice investigation...but the persistence of contrails is not in question, now or 20yrs ago...


The ability of contrails to persist is certainly relevant. If contrails can persist, then the increase in contrails over the past 20 years due to increase in air traffic and the use of high-bypass engines would mean that there would be an increase in contrails that spread out into cirrus cloud cover...

...Therefore, the amount of cloud cover today caused by spreading persistent contrails would be greater than the amount of cloud cover 20 years ago. So the ability for a contrail to persist is certainly a reason that there is a greater amount of contrail-induced cirrus cloud cover today.




awake1234
..the remnants filling the sky, for over half a day, for several days, and through inconsistent temperature patterns is...

How can you tell a cloud remnant caused by a persistent contrail lasts for "several days". Considering that clouds move daily, and the clouds you see in your sky today will be elsewhere tomorrow, how are you tracking the contrail remnant to know that they are lasting several days?

edit on 9/10/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by awake1234
 





Nice picture...really...but not comparable to the after-effects, which are the actual object, of the photograph shared in my previous post.


Well let's try this again shall we...




1967 – Plate 113 from Cloud Studies in Colour, Richard Scorer and Harry Wexler. Shows over 30 contrails, some criss-crossing:


contrailscience.com...

Is that better?



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by awake1234
 





the remnants filling the sky, for over half a day, for several days, and through inconsistent temperature patterns is.


And are these inconsistent temperature at 35000 ft or is that at ground level ?



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

awake1234
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Nice investigation...but the persistence of contrails is not in question, now or 20yrs ago...the remnants filling the sky, for over half a day, for several days, and through inconsistent temperature patterns is.
Thanks


But contrais have been known, shown and studied spreading across the sky for many decades. Its Weather 101. Maybe not for several days, but are you perhaps confusing spreading contrails ahead of a frontal system wity natural cirrostratus and altostratus asscociated with that system? Without specific examples it's obviously impossible to say, but what you describe is entirely consistent with meteorological understanding of the past 100 years.

Inconsistent temperatures require some explanation - presumably (since ground level temps are irrelevant) you are you referring to temps at the level at which these contrails/clouds occur? In which case, do you have reference to soundings to support your assertion? It may be that contrails have spread at one level ahead of a front and been replaced, overnight, by natural stratus at a different level the next day?



posted on Sep, 10 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   

awake1234
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Nice investigation...but the persistence of contrails is not in question, now or 20yrs ago...the remnants filling the sky, for over half a day, for several days, and through inconsistent temperature patterns is.


Make up your mind - either the persistence of contrails is not in question or it is - which??



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   

awake1234
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Nice investigation...but the persistence of contrails is not in question, now or 20yrs ago...the remnants filling the sky, for over half a day, for several days, and through inconsistent temperature patterns is.
Thanks


Could you please state what it is that you are concerned with?
You understand that contrails can and do persist, but you are eluding to a problem?



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 





Could you please state what it is that you are concerned with?


My guess would be...



20yrs ago the skies didnt exhibit this phenomenon.


But I could be wrong...



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Yea, but " the persistence of contrails is not in question, now or 20yrs ago" Kind of threw me off.

I keep thinking troll, but that would be rude to just say right out loud.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   

tsurfer2000h
My guess would be...

"20yrs ago the skies didnt exhibit this phenomenon."

But I could be wrong...


Yeah, but what does he mean by "this phenomenon"?

If by "this phenomenon" he means the ability for contrails to persist for hours and spread out to form a cirrus cloud, then he has already acknowledge that they could, so I don't understand what he is arguing about.

If by "this phenomenon" he means the increase in persistent contrails/cloud cover now as opposed to 20 years ago, then that has already been addressed by the fact that air traffic has increased, and the use of high-bypass engines (which are more likely to create longer-lasting contrails) has increased.

Either way, I'm not sure what he is arguing that has not already been addressed. And if he still has an issue, he needs to be more specific about that issue.



edit on 9/11/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 


The forecast for the OP and his thread. Persistent fail.... with outbreaks of further fail





new topics
 
12
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join