I think I know What Chemtrails are... and it's worse than you can imagine!

reply to post by inquisitive1977

Please see below website for information on humidity at different altitudes and the quote below the link from that website. FYI I searched for humidity levels at different altitudes and just picked this link as it looked valid and matched others.

Here is a something you may want to check out if you haven't already....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Blarneystoner

Evergreen Aviation

No, they don't have enough planes flying to spray chemtrails, but they do have this...

www.evergreenairlines.com...

And those planes are far from being able to fly, so spraying chemtrails is out of the question.

inquisitive1977
I read through about half of this thread but realized the same argument was basically being repeated again and .......FYI I searched for humidity levels at different altitudes and just picked this link as it looked valid and matched others.

www.newton.dep.anl.gov...

"Lowering the air temperature increases its relative humidity for the same partial pressure of water vapor. In general, the relative humidity of a parcel of air will increase as the air rises, because the temperature effect outweighs the vapor pressure effect."

Assuming that is true the video provided should not be possible, water vapor or humidity should be higher the higher altitude and that is the trail that should be hanging around. What we see is the opposite, the only conclusion I can see is something besides water vapor is causing the lower contrail or "chemtrail" to hang around.

you have missed a part of the explanation - "....the relative humidity will increase for the SAME PARTIAL PRESSURE OF WATER VAPOUR."

What this means is if you have a volume of air and you lower its temperature then the humidity will increase - which is perfectly true.

This is explained in the first part of the paragraph that comes from:

That does not mean, however, that if a parcel of air at 80% humidity at sea level were lifted to 5,000 feet its relative humidity would remain at 80%. First of all, its total pressure would drop, so the partial pressure of water vapor would be less than at sea level for exactly the same mixture of air and water! Additionally, the temperature would drop as well, because the air parcel will expand, and the energy of expanding comes at the expense of thermal energy. (Another way to think of this is that the potential energy of the air increases when it rises, so conservation of energy requires that its kinetic - that is, thermal - energy decreases by the same amount.) Lowering the air temperature increases its relative humidity for the same partial pressure of water vapor. In general, the relative humidity of a parcel of air will increase as the air rises, because the temperature effect outweighs the vapor pressure effect.

It is talking about taking a "parcel of air" at one altitude then taking that exact parcel to another altitude.

but as you increase altitude you are NOT taking a given parcel of air between altitudes and lowering the temperature of it - you are encountering new volumes of air that have differing amounts of water vapour in them.

So simply increasing altitude and hence decreasing temperature does not automatically increase relative humidity since the partial pressure of water vapour changes all over the sky -

It still takes a little bit of a leap to come to the conclusion Korg provided but not without reason. It would be nice if someone could confirm if those quoted documents from snowden are valid.

Actually we know the "quoted documents from Snowden" are total fabrications made up by chronicle.su - a site that specializes in satire - see www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Ok granted, it looks like I did missunderstand what I posted and it may not mean what I thought. I'm definitely not an expert, just trying to understand what I was seeing in the video.

To me it does seem strange that the humidity could be so different at the same time, in the same area just at different altitudes. When water is in vapor form I would still think the higher altitude the more likely to have more moisture, simply because of the colder temperature. If it would apply to the same parcel of air and increase it's moisture levels it would increase the moisture of the surrounding parcels of air at the higher altitude as well.

It may not be proof but it still seems to be more likely that the higher the altitude the longer it should have stayed and not the other way around.

reply to post by inquisitive1977


Yep fair enough - the atmosphere is a lot more complex than most ppl realize - you look at a clear sky and what is there to tell you the changing values of temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, etc? nothing at all - so it is easy to gloss over it without further thought.

there are places that send up balloons and take readings that you can get on the 'net - eg weather.uwyo.edu...

you can select stations from all around het world here, and get a table that has relative humidity as one of the columns - RELH %

Often relative humidity will decrease relatively evenly with height - but sometimes there are massive changes over fairly short changes in altitude too - you can select different stations or days and see just how much it changes.

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Contrails do indeed exist... They dissipate and do not form cloud cover...

Why do you believe this to be correct information?

Only under certain conditions do Contrails expand into cloud cover... Please read further into the thread where this has been discussed.

Peace,

Korg.

So first they don't, then they do, sometimes?

If you accept that they can and do expand into cloud cover (under conditions of suitably high RHI) then how can you tell when, or even if, you are looking at a chemtrail?

That appears to be self defeating at the most basic level.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Thank you Tsurfer, that other thread does hold a TON of information. It appears to be an actual expert running the thread too, if the name holds true. Haven't looked into this much myself but the idea that we might be able to offset global warming does seem interesting.

The arrogance and certainty of the OP's responses to criticism is a small annoyance in this thread. I seem to be siding with the critics here despite being indecisive over the whole chemtrail conspiracy. OP's sources are weak and seems to often base claims mainly on his own and others observations.

Again, I'd like to reiterate I am neutral, albeit somewhat interested, regarding the chemtrail conspiracy. Certainly plausible in theory and I wouldn't put it past our ailing government to resort to such evils... but again, this sort of thing requires WAY more credible evidence to even gain traction to becoming fact. Too much speculation & observation without representation imo.

SNX928
The arrogance and certainty of the OP's responses to criticism is a small annoyance in this thread. I seem to be siding with the critics here despite being indecisive over the whole chemtrail conspiracy. OP's sources are weak and seems to often base claims mainly on his own and others observations.

Again, I'd like to reiterate I am neutral, albeit somewhat interested, regarding the chemtrail conspiracy. Certainly plausible in theory and I wouldn't put it past our ailing government to resort to such evils... but again, this sort of thing requires WAY more credible evidence to even gain traction to becoming fact. Too much speculation & observation without representation imo.

edit on 2-10-2013 by SNX928 because: Rephrasing of a sentence.

So Sources Weak???

Sources from the likes of the Royal Society.... among many other reputable sources weak??

Come now...

Korg.

waynos

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Contrails do indeed exist... They dissipate and do not form cloud cover...

Why do you believe this to be correct information?

Only under certain conditions do Contrails expand into cloud cover... Please read further into the thread where this has been discussed.

Peace,

Korg.

So first they don't, then they do, sometimes?

If you accept that they can and do expand into cloud cover (under conditions of suitably high RHI) then how can you tell when, or even if, you are looking at a chemtrail?

That appears to be self defeating at the most basic level.

I've said it many times throughout this thread...

Contrails can and do expand into clouds but only under certain circumstances...

Whereas...

Chemtrails expand into clouds under all conditions and can be seen all over the place....

Ergo Contrails and Chemtrails are different...

Geeze not sure how many times I have said this now in this thread.

Korg.

Anyone seeing any trails the past couple days??

reply to post by waynos


There's no ergo about it, simply rewording the statement of acknowledgement I included in the question, as a point of clarity, does not constitute an answer.

How do you know the conditions 7 miles up are not conducive to persistent contrails and lead you to conclude you are looking at a chemtrail?

waynos
reply to post by waynos

 

There's no ergo about it, simply rewording the statement of acknowledgement I included in the question, as a point of clarity, does not constitute an answer.

How do you know the conditions 7 miles up are not conducive to persistent contrails and lead you to conclude you are looking at a chemtrail?

No ergo about it.... please....

Have some objective reasoning based upon observations, there is more than enough evidence presented within this thread to at least suggest to those that do not or have not had the chance to look at this previously.

If you want to believe that all contrails are natural and that the recent and quite sudden cessation of global warming is perfectly natural... that's fine by me.

But simply ignoring the wealth of evidence to the contrary including official government documents, scientific papers, thousands of observed events and the IPCC's very own data, is simply silly.

I understand I really do, it's often hard and frightening to consider when you have been brain washed to be closed minded and believe everything they tell you.

Let me ask you a question...

Do you think the Governments have ever lied to you?

Korg.

Korg Trinity

If you want to believe that all contrails are natural
Korg.

Until you can answer this question

How do you know the conditions 7 miles up are not conducive to persistent contrails and lead you to conclude you are looking at a chemtrail?

I will thanks.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


That was a very long winded way of avoiding giving a direct answer. You see that's the problem I have with you guys. You have lots and lots of supposition, opinion and misinterpretation that you call "a wealth of evidence", but when faced with a simple direct question that gets to the root of believing in chemtrails it simply results in deflection, if it gets a response at all.

Because I actually understand why I am looking at contrails and require more solid information on the existence of chemtrails than "because I say so" you trot out the old standards about trusting my government (if only you knew!!!)

That's what our transatlantic cousins call an epic fail.

Seriously chap, believe what the hell you want, but don't go around pretending you are more enlightened than everyone else and if you cannot answer a question, just admit it.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Until you can show why a contrail cannot be a contrail, you are just blowing sunshine up someones backside.
Every white line in the sky I have seen in real life and in pictures has looked just like a contrail. Acted just like a contrail. And did just what I would expect a contrail to do. So it would take quite the dumbass to decide that just because you "think" they shouldn't be there they must be a chemtrail. Without knowing the conditions at the altitude where the lines form, YOU DONT KNOW.

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

That's what our transatlantic cousins call an epic fail.

Seriously chap, believe what the hell you want, but don't go around pretending you are more enlightened than everyone else and if you cannot answer a question, just admit it.

I haven't pretended to be anything, I have not attempted to divert questions other than the people who frankly are not open to discussion, they have their opinion and they feel the need to impress that opinion as fact.

I have not done this, and stated that there is evidence to suggest both the existence of chemtrails and the reasoning behind my conclusions.

If you choose not to follow my way of thinking that's fine, I have no issue with that, but getting angry over the fact that someone has a different opinion especially when they present supporting evidence is frankly stupid.

I also think that this thread has certainly ousted one or two members as either guardians of the official truth or in having some kind of agenda, in one case a members who outward opposed my views has not posted on anything else other than to post anti-chemtrail comments in the entire time they have been a member on ATS.

I wonder if these people are just so closed minded to other possibilities other than their own neat well established main stream views, that anything outside of their belief system is highly offensive...

Or..

They really do have an agenda to attempt to derail or discredit anything other than the main stream view.

I hope any would be reader of this thread could make their own minds up about that and dig a little deeper, maybe monitoring the threads and posts of these individuals closer over time.

It sure would make interesting analysis.

Peace,

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity

Chemtrails expand into clouds under all conditions and can be seen all over the place....

Why would chemtrails expand into clouds under ALL conditions?

Do chemtrails not require moisture to expand as contrails do?

DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Chemtrails expand into clouds under all conditions and can be seen all over the place....

Why would chemtrails expand into clouds under ALL conditions?

Do chemtrails not require moisture to expand as contrails do?

Who knows for sure what is in these chemtrails... but I can tell you what I think, it's designed to create reflective cloud cover causing a global dimming effect..

Perhaps it allows cloud cover to form from less humidity who knows... What I do know is that for persistent contrails, i.e. contrails to form clouds the conditions have to be just right. Those conditions do not occur all the time, yet when you look up... there they are on a daily basis.

Peace,

Korg.