Chemtrails

Status
Not open for further replies.

Handson

Active Member
So who believes in them?

I do, they are a regular occurrence here, planes spraying white mist at an altitude, which turns into a white haze in front of the sun by 12pm.

Today they sprayed 10 lines, east to west, all equally spaced. Now they are descending from their original altitude, getting fluffier and fluffier in front of the sun. A contrail goes within 20 minutes. They have been getting heavier over the last hour. a few of these trails go from horizon to horizon.

There are many theories as to what they are, but they are definitely NOT contrails.
 

Handson

Active Member
Well I took a photo every 20 mins, the white haze is over us now, as I predicted.

First pic was at 9am

Second at 9:20

Third at 9:40

Fourth at 10am

There have been some very strange flight patterns this morning too, watched a plane leave a trail over Liverpool, switch it off, switch it on again and snake over Cheshire, then head towards Manchester pumping out shite, this trail still hasn't gone...
 

Attachments

lozac123

Well-Known Member
dude, wtf? everyone must believe in them, theyre everywhere! i can see like 5 of them now!

i just call them plane trails. i assumes it was like a line of exhaust fumes?
 

Handson

Active Member
dude, wtf? everyone must believe in them, theyre everywhere! i can see like 5 of them now!

i just call them plane trails. i assumes it was like a line of exhaust fumes?
There's a definite difference between the exhaust con trails and the chem trails

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXn4tVpgeHk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaQV4fYzB3U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEOod0LFDtI&feature=related <--- think this pilot is going nuts because of his job

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQs12kpE7_Q&feature=watch_response
 

lozac123

Well-Known Member
yeah, god, sorry, id never heard of them until now!

meh, between fluride, chemtrails and aspartame, were all gonna die!
 

lozac123

Well-Known Member
'Cloud Albedo​
It has been proposed that the Earth could be cooled by whitening clouds over parts

of the ocean.'

dude, do live near the sea? i do, and the more i look at it, the more the chemtrails could be them doing this!

 

iNVESTIGATE

Well-Known Member
Riiiighht. You can tell it's a chemtrail just by it's appearance. :roll:


Yeah, actually you can. What's so absurd about that??

One of the basic steps in The Scientific Method is observation.


Contrails are made up of water vapour. Condensation trails as it were usually dissipate within 30-45 seconds to a couple minutes after the plane has passed.

Chemtrails, however, last anywhere from 3-4 hours to a whole day. And can contain a number of different ommitedly harmful chemicals/metals.



Not sure if anyone checked out that Patent i posted up above. But it details the invention of a 'powder contrail generator/dispenser'.


The Following Is An Excerpt From The Official US Patent PDF...


Assignee:
The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy (Washington, DC)


Obviously many modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in the light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Yeah, actually you can. What's so absurd about that??

One of the basic steps in The Scientific Method is observation.


Contrails are made up of water vapour. Condensation trails as it were usually dissipate within 30-45 seconds to a couple minutes after the plane has passed.

Chemtrails, however, last anywhere from 3-4 hours to a whole day. And can contain a number of different ommitedly harmful chemicals/metals.
Sorry, contrails can last a long time depending on temperature and humidity.
Yes, science is about observation but a hypothesis to explain those observations must be backed by evidence. All you have observed is variable appearance of contrails with no evidence to your claim that the longer lasting ones are somehow different in composition.
As I pointed out in the picture above, why were there so many long lasting contrails made by WWII prop driven airplanes?
Look at the Memphis Bell video and how as the bombers move through various thermoclines, the contrails break off and the reform then eventually get very thick and persistent just like your 'chemtrails.' The weather is the main factor that determines if a contrail is short and disappears or thick and forms into clouds. Why do you think clouds form to begin with? Water vapor is water vapor whether created by natural means or created by combustion of an airplane's engine.
[youtube]wfOrez6q7WM[/youtube]

Not sure if anyone checked out that Patent i posted up above. But it details the invention of a 'powder contrail generator/dispenser'.


The Following Is An Excerpt From The Official US Patent PDF...


Assignee:
The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy (Washington, DC)


Obviously many modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in the light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described.
Yes, I looked at the patent and it clearly says it is for sky writing. Nothing really sinister about that now.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Why do some planes leave long trails and others don't?

A question that comes up with some consistency is based on the observation that some planes in the sky leave trails that persist and spread, and other planes, in the same sky, leave short-lived trails, or no trails at all.
This difference is often used as evidence of the &#8220;chemtrail&#8221; theory, which states that the longer lasting trails (or some of them) are being deliberately manipulated for some reason. So you see helpful images like this.

These trails are called contrails. They are not smoke from the engines, they are formed when the water in jet exhaust (and there&#8217;s a lot of it, like car exhaust on a cold day) mixes with wet cold air, and condenses out as ice crystals. Contrails are actually a type of cirrus cloud. When the air is wet and cold enough the trails can stay around for a long time, and sometimes spread out.
Now there are two main reasons why some planes leave trails and some do not. One, the less common reason, is that different planes have different engines. Some engines need different conditions to leave contrails. Here, for example are an Airbus A340 (maiden flight: 1991) on the left, leaving contrails, and a Boeing 707 (maiden flight: 1957) not leaving contrails. Both are flying at 33,000 feet (part of a German test to study contrail formation), but the newer engines of the A340 produce more water vapor at a different temperature, and so make contrails.

So, on to the main reason why you see trails on some planes but not on others, and I&#8217;ll emphasize it, because although it&#8217;s simple, it&#8217;s also easy to miss.
The planes are at different altitudes.

Yes, it&#8217;s really that simple. The reason that one plane makes contrails, or makes contrails that persist, and the other plane does not, is that they are in different regions of air. For simplicity, let&#8217;s refer to these regions of air as wet air and dry air, although the differences are a bit more complex.
When the plane is in wet air, it makes a contrail. In dry air it does not.
Surely, you might object, they would have to be miles apart? Well, no, and that brings me to another point I fear I must emphasise:
Wet and dry air can exist within a few feet of each other.

Consider, for example, clouds:

Inside the cloud it&#8217;s wet. Outside it&#8217;s dry. What&#8217;s the difference between inside and outside? It&#8217;s a few feet.
Look at the bottom of those clouds, see them extend off into the distance. They form a layer at a specific altitude. Above that altitude there are clouds. Below it there are no clouds. The difference between clouds and no clouds is just a few feet.
Now those are low altitude cumulus couds. Let&#8217;s look at high altitude clouds.

Again they are in a flat layer. The different between being in the layer and not in the layer is just a few feet.
This layering of the air into wet and dry layers is not limited to clouds. Seemingly clear air also contains exactly the same kind of variation in layers. This was very neatly illustrated by the recent launch of the Solar Dynamics Observatory. As it ascended it did not leave a contrail, until it hit a layer of wet air, when it left a contrail that lasted quite a while, and then it went into dry air again, and no more contrail

So, if a plane were flying in that middle region then it would probably leave a persisting contrail. If it were above or below it then it would not.
But, you may cry, the planes are at the same altitude. Now you might even disagree with a &#8220;few feet&#8221;, and say the planes were too close for them to be in different layers. I&#8217;d respond with:
You can&#8217;t tell how high a plane is

And you certainly can&#8217;t tell if one plane is at the same altitude as another. These planes fly at 30,000 to 40,000 feet. Let&#8217;s see what the visual difference is at around that altitude:

I took one image of a jet nominally at 35,000 feet. Then scaled it for 34,000 (102.9%) and 32,000 feet (109.4%). I think you&#8217;ll agree they all look pretty much the same. Especially as this is more zoomed in than you&#8217;d see with the naked eye, which would be more like:
[ed: Scaling not working on this forum, see original link]
Or, considering you generally can hardly see the wings of a plane with the naked eye, a fully realistic representation would be:

If the planes are flying lower, then it&#8217;s still similar. If the top plane was flying at 20,000 feet, then the bottom would be at 18,285 feet, still nearly 2,000 feet apart, and looking pretty much the same to the naked eye.
And that is with the same model of plane, directly overhead, and right next to each other. A situation that almost never occurs. If the planes are different, or separated, or at an angle to you, then it is IMPOSSIBLE for you tell the relative altitudes when they are high in the sky. Just look at this:

Or from the ground, with the planes at 30,000 feet.

They look about the same height, right? In fact if they were not overlapping, you&#8217;d think the JAL plane was lower, as it seems bigger, hence closer. But actually the JAL plane (a B777) is at least 1000 feet above the DHL plane (an A300).
So, a simple question gets a simple answer:
The planes leave different trails because the planes are at different altitudes.
 

Handson

Active Member
'Cloud Albedo​
It has been proposed that the Earth could be cooled by whitening clouds over parts

of the ocean.'

dude, do live near the sea? i do, and the more i look at it, the more the chemtrails could be them doing this!

Yeah, I live along the coast.

And guess what...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8621407.stm

They were out before, even though all flights are grounded.

The Air Traffic Control Service (Nats) said no flights would be allowed in or out of UK airspace until 1800BST amid fears of engine damage.



Those last 2 photos are bullshit, those planes are never 1000 feet apart. if they were on the ground, 1000 feet apart, they wouldn't look like that.

A 1000 feet is a 1000 feet, straight up, straight ahead, behind you, where ever. If those planes were on the ground, 1000 feet apart, they wouldn't look like that.

What about the planes that fly below 6000 feet and have been recorded spraying?
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Those last 2 photos are bullshit, those planes are never 1000 feet apart. if they were on the ground, 1000 feet apart, they wouldn't look like that.

A 1000 feet is a 1000 feet, straight up, straight ahead, behind you, where ever. If those planes were on the ground, 1000 feet apart, they wouldn't look like that.

What about the planes that fly below 6000 feet and have been recorded spraying?
Yea, fuck those aviation experts, they don't know what they are talking about. :roll:

Maybe if you knew anything about photography, you would understand that long lenses will make distance between objects appear compressed. Hollywood and photographers use these techniques to force perspective and create an optical illusion.
Near Miss Over London
Status: Optical Illusion
Barry Bland snapped a photograph of two airplanes apparently narrowly avoiding colliding in the sky over London. However, Civil Aviation Authorities are dismissing the photograph as an optical illusion, pointing out that none of their safety systems indicated that the two planes were close to each other. The BBC reports:

British Air Line Pilots Association chairman Captain Mervyn Granshaw described it as a "fluke photograph". He explained how visual factors conspire to make the planes could look closer together, but safety measures meant they could not be in such proximity. While the lower plane was a A300, a smaller freight plane, the one behind was a JAL A330 - a larger, passenger plane. The difference in size, angle of the photograph and the distance it was taken from - the ground to two planes at high altitude - would exaggerate the effect, he said.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.
I'm an empiricist. Until the chemtrail supporters provide actual evidence to support their claims I will remain skeptical.

Let's hear your absolute best evidence and I know I could be swayed by good science and logic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top