It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Merry CHEMTRAILS and Happy New Year!!!

page: 11
6
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 
Prove to me that they're not? See, you want the "chemtrailers" to capture and test one of their trails...but, the same could be ask of you. Prove to us they're NOT chemtrails? Afterall, the burden of proof, is really on those polluting the skies. Not the other way around.

But see, those polluting the skies, own the companies that builds the planes, the gas that fuels them and the people that fly them. They own the regulators and write the laws. They even re-write books and change information on the internet.

Last, but not least, let's not forget the amount of money that can be or has been made from this technology.




posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





Well perhaps, we should scratch the silly theory people keep spewing that persisting contrails are caused by "approaching storm fronts"; considering that most of the weather that occurs on our planet happens below 15,000 feet. Weather


Silly theory you say...


s. Nearly simultaneous data from the Europe Model of the Deutscher Wetterdienst have been
used to find typical weather conditions associated with 742 persistent contrails. Further, a flow pattern
analysis identifies typical regions where the occurrence of contrails was above average. These regions are
in the upper atmosphere: (a) ahead of a surface warm front either in moist warm layers before the cirrus
clouds arrive or more likely with the cirrus in a warm conveyor belt and (b) ahead of a surface cold
front in rapidly moving cold air in the turbulent regions near a band of strong wind (though the speed
is not necessarily as high as in a jet). Usually, the atmosphere is baroclinic in the contrail region. Most of
the detected contrails occur in divergent flow patterns in the upper troposphere in slowly rising warm or
locally turbulent cold air masses.


onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Science is silly isn't it.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   

WonderBoi
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 
Well perhaps, we should scratch the silly theory people keep spewing that persisting contrails are caused by "approaching storm fronts"; considering that most of the weather that occurs on our planet happens below 15,000 feet. Weather


That's not quite accurate to say that "persisting contrails are caused by approaching storm fronts".
What is accurate to say is that the atmospheric conditions that often precede a storm front are also often conducive to contrail persistence.

There is a slight difference. Your way makes it sound as if the front is causing the ability for trails to persist. Technically, the conditions ahead of a front often allow BOTH the front to maintain itself AND allows for contrail persistence.



And while rain clouds are usually below 15,000 feet, it is the atmospheric conditions of the entire air column that contribute to those low rain clouds. What I mean is, those low clouds may be there because of the conditions of the atmosphere high above them.

In the case of an approaching warm front, high cirrus clouds may precede conditions that lead to the lowering of clouds that could lead to rain. Ahead of all of that are the conditions that are often conducive to contrail persistence.

Warm Fronts and the weather they bring:


And(below) the air column at a warm front. As you can see, the rain is happening low, but the rest of the atmosphere above the rain clouds are affected. Also, the very high currus clouds can precede the front by severl hundred miles, and the air directly preceding that was conducive to cirrus clouds (hence their ability to form), and similarly, persistent contrails:



edit on 1/1/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





Prove to me that they're not? See, you want the "chemtrailers" to capture and test one of their trails...but, the same could be ask of you. Prove to us they're NOT chemtrails? Afterall, the burden of proof, is really on those polluting the skies. Not the other way around.


Actually it is.

You see you have to prove they exist and aren't contrails persistent or otherwise, or guess what they are contrails.

You have been given more than enough scientific and other evidence that shows you what they are, but you just seem to ignore it



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





But see, those polluting the skies, own the companies that builds the planes, the gas that fuels them and the people that fly them. They own the regulators and write the laws. They even re-write books and change information on the internet.


So what have they re written on the internet, just one example will suffice.

Btw how are you doing with debunking my links?



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 
Yup! It's even sillier when you start mixing stuff together.
Chemical Compound

A pure chemical compound is a chemical substance that is composed of a particular set of molecules or ions. Two or more elements combined into one substance through a chemical reaction form a chemical compound. All compounds are substances, but not all substances are compounds. A chemical compound can be either atoms bonded together in molecules or crystals in which atoms, molecules or ions form a crystalline lattice. Compounds based primarily on carbon and hydrogen atoms are called organic compounds, and all others are called inorganic compounds.
Now, on to your article, which says

Long-living contrails indicate moist layers in the upper troposphere where there is either rapidly moving cold air or slowly ascending warm air. A relationship between the spreading of a contrail and the wind speed at upper-tropospheric lev- els has already been identified by Peppler (1930).
and then there's this

The troposphere is the layer closest to the Earth, approximately 11km high. Weather occurs only in the troposphere because it is this layer that contains most of the water vapour. Weather is the way water changes in the air, and so without water there would be no clouds, rain, snow or other weather features. The troposphere is an unstable layer where the air is constantly moving. As a result, aircraft flying through the troposphere may have a very bumpy ride – what we know as turbulence. You may have experienced this when flying before! Because of this turbulence, most jet airlines fly higher above the Earth in the stratosphere. Here the air is more still and clear as they can fly above the clouds
So, if they're flying in the stratosphere, why are there trails in the troposphere, according to you, your crew and weather theories? Weather is formed at 15,000 and those planes are what, roughly 30,000 according to you and your crew?



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 
You've been given enough knowledge to figure it out. Those are chemical trails causing a chemical reaction at 30,000 feet. Interestingly enough, the Stratosphere has the same gases as the troposphere.

Within this layer, temperature increases as altitude increases (see temperature inversion); the top of the stratosphere has a temperature of about 270 K (−3°C or 29.6°F), just slightly below the freezing point of water. The stratosphere is layered in temperature because ozone (O3) here absorbs high energy UVB and UVC energy waves from the Sun and is broken down into atomic oxygen (O) and diatomic oxygen (O2). Atomic oxygen is found prevalent in the upper stratosphere due to the bombardment of UV light and the destruction of both ozone and diatomic oxygen. The mid stratosphere has less UV light passing through it, O and O2 are able to combine, and is where the majority of natural ozone is produced. It is when these two forms of oxygen recombine to form ozone that they release the heat found in the stratosphere. The lower stratosphere receives very low amounts of UVC, thus atomic oxygen is not found here and ozone is not formed (with heat as the byproduct).
Are you looking for answers are trying to give some? If so, on the latter, quit.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Wow, what a combination of keyboard warrior postings and verbal ping-pong, it's fair given me a headache...

Time to inject some humour, it's relevant, I think...

What do you call a sheep with no legs?
A cloud!

Yes, I know, a ba'ad joke but ewe should have seen it coming.

Now, as for these alleged chemtrails...




posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Shuftystick
 
This, coming from someone who just joined ATS? lol There's been a lot of that going on, lately. You could be a shill, just like the other guys, perpetrating to be lovers of "science". lmfao



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





Those are chemical trails causing a chemical reaction at 30,000 feet.


If that is so, I would expect to see more consistency with regards to persistence.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





This, coming from someone who just joined ATS? lol There's been a lot of that going on, lately. You could be a shill, just like the other guys, perpetrating to be lovers of "science". lmfao


Now why the rude attitude toward new members?

So what you are saying is that you don't love science, because it's all around you that you take advantage of daily.
edit on 1-1-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 
The new member came here acting like he was ready to play with the big boys. Unfortunately, none of you are ready. You're like......100 years behind. lol You still making fire with sticks. lol



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





The new member came here acting like he was ready to play with the big boys.


DO you not think the same about yourself?



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





You're like......100 years behind. lol You still making fire with sticks. lol


Doesn't everybody as it does help when lighting a fire.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





The new member came here acting like he was ready to play with the big boys.


DO you not think the same about yourself?
Nope. I stomp them.
On the serious level, if this were an actual debate, you'd lose. You know why? You're focused on the player, not the ball. Now, back to those darn molecules.
Do you know the reason why rubbing sticks together creates fire? lol



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





Nope. I stomp them. On the serious level, if this were an actual debate, you'd lose. You know why? You're focused on the player, not the ball. Now, back to those darn molecules. Do you know the reason why rubbing sticks together creates fire? lol


So I guess no more evidence to prove your pics in the OP are chemtrails, because you seem to have wandered a tad bit off topic in your last few posts?

That would be friction.

edit on 1-1-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 09:58 PM
link   

WonderBoi
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 
You've been given enough knowledge to figure it out. Those are chemical trails causing a chemical reaction at 30,000 feet.



What chemicals causing what reaction?



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   

WonderBoi
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 
Prove to me that they're not? See, you want the "chemtrailers" to capture and test one of their trails...but, the same could be ask of you. Prove to us they're NOT chemtrails? Afterall, the burden of proof, is really on those polluting the skies. Not the other way around.


The people polluting the skies have already tested the trails and found that they are.....water crystals, and jet exhaust pollution.

People claiming they are chemtrails are claiming they are something else - but can't actually show any credible evidence WHAT.

I don't say I have any PROOF that long white trails in the skies are not chemtrails - I say they look like contrails, they behave like contrails, they are generated like contrails - the conform to everything we know about contrails so all ht evidence I am aware of says they are contrails. If they are not contrails then what's the evidence to support that?

People are making claims that things that look like contrails are no contrails - so that's the claim that requires the evidence - the evidence they ARE contrails already exists.




edit on 1-1-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: tags



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   

WonderBoi

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





The new member came here acting like he was ready to play with the big boys.


DO you not think the same about yourself?
Nope. I stomp them.
On the serious level, if this were an actual debate, you'd lose. You know why? You're focused on the player, not the ball. Now, back to those darn molecules.
Do you know the reason why rubbing sticks together creates fire? lol


There is the capacity to cut and paste and avoid debate, that is all you have shown. Every direct question to you is met with a quote from somewhere else, you do not have a clue about debate, or about contrails. That is one thing you have consistently shown.

This is but the first of several questions put to you two pages ago that all your posts since have ignored


why can't contrails persist and grow into clouds, why do they have to dissipate immediately and why does this not apply to cirrus clouds?


Until you can support your claims with a straight answer to this, all your subsequent posts are just background noise and avoidance.

Grow up.
edit on 2-1-2014 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 02:39 AM
link   
Miss Smith, please take a memo, address it to all Keyboard Warriors...

It has been noted that unsupervised adolescents have been resorting to type and throwing verbal brickbats.
If these somewhat immature contributors cannot concentrate on the bigger picture and reduce their ego footprint perhaps they would like to take their attitudes elsewhere and leave ATS for those more able to maintain a reasonable standard of behaviour.

It is obvious to this, recent, member, that lack of time served has got f*** all to do with ones value to the forum and members.

Shill I certainly am not, as basic research of my postings would easily reveal. Sure as heck seen enough of life to see through one or two of the soap box heroes that post on ATS.

My advice to anyone wishing to analyse my position or background, always check the mirror first!

Intelligent debate and denial of ignorance are a world apart from hollow diatribe.

Get a life, you know who you are

Now, chemtrails was it...

All intelligent debaters are recommended to search the US Patent Office database under patent number search for patent number 3,899,144. For this relative newbie to the forum, my only comment would be, since 8/12/75 or 12/8/75 (UK), what developments to this type of technology have occurred?

As Rumpole of the Bailey would have said "Your Honour, I rest my case."

edit on 2-1-2014 by Shuftystick because: Omission of quote from Horace Rumpole Barrister at Law, 4 Equity Chambers, London



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join