Scientists, Pilots, & Doctors on Chemtrails

originally posted by: VoidHawk
Unles they've changed their names, I predict aloy and net will be along very soon!

Well let's face it, it's been a bit quiet around here lately - it's as if the believers have all finally figured out they are not going to be allowed to spout BS without having it pointed out, and so have retreated to their censored FB groups and other forums - that way they don't have to think much.

but here you are to prove that theory wrong!!

originally posted by: NTellect
Haven't been here in years but came across this for all the contrail disinformers ..

www.youtube.com...=49

your thoughts?

Thoughts? That's easy.

I would much rather believe a bunch of everyday, identifiable, legitimate pilots, doctors and scientists rather than some anonymous posters on here who could possibly be paid to post and supress the truth.

a reply to: Zaphod58

In certain cases, under certain circumstances, and to a certain degree maybe. But this is consistent now, and they are growing more as well than they were when I first started watching them. I really wish I could have snapped that photo today. It was pretty insane the grid and growth and ceiling they formed. Maybe they'll repeat the trick tomorrow.

I've been a sky watcher since birth and have lived in many places near some large airports and bases, and something has changed over the decades.

I can't honestly say I know what's going on, but I do know that the skies didn't used to be like this. Ever. And I think that maybe I just live in a place where this happens more and travel to places where it doesn't and that people who don't happene to live in a place where it happens just really don't have a clue. But there is definitely something odd going on here.

I don't argue this. I've watched the planes trace the routes. I've also read all the science, mapped the weather, and followed the planes to airport and been buzzed by a helicopter. I know something's up. I just don't know what.

Dark.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

No.

ETA: Don't waste your typing on me. I know.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

How do you quantify what is a "certain" degree?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Yes, something is up. New engine technology is in use that allows contrails to form at a much lower altitude than ever before, and persist more than before. Which means that there are more contrails, and more persistent contrails than there were before. There's a great picture that shows an Airbus with high bypass turbofans leaving a nice contrail behind it, while right next to it at the same altitude, a 707 with low bypass turbofans doesn't leave anything but a smoke trail behind it.

I drive a truck, so I'm all over the country, and I'm the biggest avnerd you'll meet, so if I see a plane I'm watching it. I've never seen anything that doesn't exactly look like a contrail, exactly act like a contrail, or appear to be anything BUT a contrail. Not once.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

No.

Fair enough - you are perfectly entitled to ignore real studies and instead choose to believe some stupid carp that makes no sense at all.

Stupid ain't illegal.

ETA: Don't waste your typing on me. I know.

I'm glad for you - but perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what this is supposed to mean?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: NTellect
Haven't been here in years but came across this for all the contrail disinformers ..

www.youtube.com...=49

your thoughts?

Thoughts? That's easy.

I would much rather believe a bunch of everyday, identifiable, legitimate pilots, doctors and scientists rather than some anonymous posters on here who could possibly be paid to post and supress the truth.

I posted a link just above to some identifiable scientists who actually studied this phenomena and published their findings.

I'd rather believe them than a bunch of "everyday, identifiable, legitimate pilots, doctors and scientists" who publically spout nonsense, tell lies, exaggerate their qualifications, fail to provide any credible evidence, and even contradict themselves within seconds.

I don't think there are any "legitimate pilots" in that lot at all - they stuff spouted by the people who CLAIM to be pilots is just so easily shown to be wrong by real studies that are properly documented, so I have no reason to believe something someone says that they do not back up with credible evidence.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Yes, something is up. New engine technology is in use that allows contrails to form at a much lower altitude than ever before, and persist more than before. Which means that there are more contrails, and more persistent contrails than there were before. There's a great picture that shows an Airbus with high bypass turbofans leaving a nice contrail behind it, while right next to it at the same altitude, a 707 with low bypass turbofans doesn't leave anything but a smoke trail behind it.

And here's the paper that tells you why this is the caseTest of propulsive efficiency on contrail formation - note that the authors can be identified

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

How dare they publish in a peer-reviewed journal!
I'm incensed.
They must be part of 'The Establishment' and thus can't be trusted.

I would much rather glean my misinformation from glorified blog-sites written by people with hazy credentials.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

legitimate scientists ??????????????????

allan buckmann , CLAIMS to be a biologist - but makes the statement :

" how did monsanoto know to create aluminium resistant plants , I don't think anyone asked that question "

now there are 2 possibilities :

1 - he is the only " biologist " who doesn't understand aluminium toxicity

2 - he is a liar

which is it - and why do you trust him ?????????

a reply to: ignorant_ape

He has a BSc in Wildlife Management from Humbolt - see here and then was employed:

California Department of Fish & Game 1968-2007: Allan was hired by the California DFG as a Wildlife Biologist and Scientist, where he spent 38+ years in environmental assessment of wildlife species and evaluation of development projects, in addition to the State capture team for deer, antelope, elk and miscellaneous problem species.

so I guess his job title was biologist....but his training has nothing at all to do with plant biology, so he has no expertise in the area.

I'm going with liar - just another case of someone pumping up their supposed credentials to make carp look good.

Aloysius so what you're saying is you aren't concerned at all ? These things in the sky raise absolutely no suspicion, you are 100% okay with this multitude of foreign lines in the sky? Because I've been watching these get sprayed since i was around 5 or 6 years old (21 now) and it definitely concerns me.

a reply to: NTellect
There is nothing being sprayed other than jet exhaust (which is mostly water and CO2).

But, since you've been brought up in the "chemtrail" age (which started about 15 to 20 years ago) you don't know that persistent contrails have existed since airplanes could fly high enough to produce them. There are a lot of us who have been watching them for, oh, more than twice as long as you've been around at all.

From 1919:

The second German sighting occurred on May 9, 1919, when a pilot flying over Berlin at about 26,000 feet noticed the generation of a cloud stream that extended for about forty miles behind his plane. This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.

www.accessmylibrary.com...

1944:

So an airplane at great heights leaves behind it, stretching for endless miles, a visible "wake" composed of ice particles so tiny that they do not fall as snow but remain suspended in the air.

Source


From 1968:

Daily, for example, hundreds of jet planes crisscross the nation or great parts of it, often leaving fluffy contrails of water vapor, manmade clouds, as a signature of their passage.

Some contrails soon dissapate. Others turn into or are soon followed by high cirruse clouds that can and do influence the earth's heat balance with the sun.

Source


From 1970:

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent conditions exist from 25,000 to 40,000ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.

journals.ametsoc.org...


1972:

Then there is the matter of cloudiness. The familiar contrails often left by high-flying planes might persist for a long time under some conditions.

Source

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

There you go, calling people "stupid" again...

Very scientific...

a reply to: applesthateatpeople
No one was called stupid.

However, there were a lot of stupid statements made. That's a different matter.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I can't honestly say I know what's going on, but I do know that the skies didn't used to be like this. Ever.

When I was a child, behind my house was all natural bush and scrub. Today there is a dual lane highway.

It was needed because there was just too much traffic for the old skinny road it replaced.

More people, more cars.

It's the same deal with air traffic, more people, more planes.

a reply to: Phage

For example:

You're not stupid.

Just everything you have said is stupid.

Right?

And I'm sure no one would be offended by that...

People who resort to calling ANYTHING "stupid" are ALWAYS the least intelligent.

Always.

a reply to: applesthateatpeople

People who resort to calling ANYTHING "stupid" are ALWAYS the least intelligent.
Always.

So... you just said this, where does that put you?

Just everything you have said is stupid.

No. There are plenty of stupid things in this world. People do stupid things (I saw some pretty stupid maneuvers on the freeway this afternoon), people say stupid things.

For example, making very broad generalizations about people is stupid.

a reply to: Phage

And who decides what is stupid. You?

Obviously, considering your last few comments.

Judge away.

I don't know you.

You don't know me.

If you are able to look me in the eyes and call my "broad generalization" "stupid" face to face, then I would know you better.

But, I'll never know.

Which makes you... nothing (to me).

Right?