I was in Palmdale and the Chem-trail pollution was off the charts

a reply to: turbonium1

You have said planes fly over you. It's on you to prove it.

Otherwise you're just another Internet no one who we're all supposed to be because "reasons".

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: turbonium1
You might know why I'm asking you for time of departure...

One plane leaves Detroit, one plane leaves Atlanta.

The two planes are 600 miles apart, at departure point

Detroit to Vancouver flight distance is 1959 miles. 4 hrs., 26 minutes flight duration
Atlanta to Vancouver is 2247 miles. 4 hrs. 59 min. flight duration.

The two planes are 2-3 minutes apart from each other, flying in nearly perfect parallel paths, directly over YVR, as they both leave trails, while going to two different cities, in two different countries, some 900 miles apart.

Do you understand how flight paths work?

Planes fly on radials from navigation beacons. So why do you find it so surprising that they follow the same path? Try watching the skies and you will see that planes tend to fly along the same routes rather than randomly in all directions. It is no more suspicious than cars all following the freeway.

Correct. And there are several of those routes (just like there are several highways), but not so many that planes just fly randomly, as you aptly put it.

There are a few basic routes over the Pacific. The route that goes to places such as Tokyo and Seoul from the continental U.S. follow a path that starts in the NW corner of the U.S./SW corner of Canada. Most U.S. routes from U.S. cities such as Chicago, Atlanta, and Detroit head toward this NW corner of the U.S., usually skirting the border, staying for the most part within U.S. airspace (I don't think it is a legal requirement, but rather a "best practice" in case of emergency landing) until it reaches that corner of the U.S. and Canada, between Seattle and Vancouver.

At that point -- which could be only a few miles south of Vancouver, but well within the distance a plane could be seen from Vancouver -- planes join the route that takes them over the Pacific (which, due to the Great Circle, will head along the Aleutian Islands).

I'm not referring to those planes. I've clearly explained this matter to you, over and over again....

Don't keep playing the ignorant fool, it's never going to work!


The planes I'm referring to go OVER me, that's my point!!


No more excuses!!

A plane just 10 miles away (ground distance) would look to be about 3/4 of the way straight up from the horizon. Other than that, if these planes are directly overhead from downtown Vancouver and creating a contrail, then it might be military.

However, if you are talking about simply planes in general (without trails), then those could be flights coming into Vancouver.

The may appear high when they fly overhead, but that could be because (depending on the direction they would be taking off and landing, which changes with the wind direction), planes taking off might first fly westward over the Straight of Georgia -- even as far as Vancouver island, and then turn eastward, often flying directly over the city of Vancouver, then head toward destinations eastward.

In those cases, they probably would not climb up to contrail altitudes before flying over the city, but they might be relatively high (10,000 feet or more; probably not yet reaching contrail-producing altitudes).

Planes landing might also first fly over the city, past the city and airport over the Straight of Georgia, before turning back toward the east to land in an easterly direction on Runway 08-L or 08-R. . However, I think those planes on approach would be lower as they flew over the city.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: turbonium1

If you really want to know the truth, anyway...

no doubt. It's kind of obvious you aren't all that interested, at least not enough to make a phone call.
Remember, vinegar.

Who holds up a video, as proof, but fails, and never speaks of it, after. ?


Planes fly over me, not an illusion.

No planes have to fly over a major international airport, which is in another country.

What miracle that two planes were flying over Vancouver international airport, the very same day, only a minute or so apart, on parallel paths?

Your estimate was meant to support your claim, obviously.

You can't avoid it, after it backfired.


Face up to your own claims, and face up to the ugly truth

a reply to: fema1

I have a question how much material do you think you would need for sprayers. If those were Chem trails in that picture these planes sprayed for miles. So how could they do that yet manage to take off. It would require more chemicas than a plane can haul just to make a mile long contrail. Some in that picture were well beyond that. If you ever seen cloud seeding etc it's very short and more like a dump because at altitude chemicals disperse quickly and become useless

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: turbonium1

If you really want to know the truth, anyway...

no doubt. It's kind of obvious you aren't all that interested, at least not enough to make a phone call.
Remember, vinegar.

Planes fly over me, not an illusion.

On the evidence presented so far we have to assume that you're either mistaken or making it up

a reply to: dragonridr

400 pounds of smoke oil to do some skywriting.

Skywriting would be chemtrails of a sort when you think about it.

So far, you have no proof of these two planes being commercial flights.

That's what you still need to show me, now.


Prove it, or admit you cannot prove it.

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: turbonium1

If you really want to know the truth, anyway...

no doubt. It's kind of obvious you aren't all that interested, at least not enough to make a phone call.
Remember, vinegar.

Planes fly over me, not an illusion.

On the evidence presented so far we have to assume that you're either mistaken or making it up

Have you seen the video? The trails estimated to be over YVR, in Richmond?

I live, and work, in Richmond, near YVR, btw

Anything else?

originally posted by: turbonium1
So far, you have no proof of these two planes being commercial flights.

So far, you have no proof of planes flying over you.

That's what you still need to show me, now.

You still need to show US that planes fly over you, now.

Prove it, or admit you cannot prove it.

Prove that planes fly over you, or admit you cannot prove it.

a reply to: turbonium1

at this point, the only video I have seen that I assume you are speaking about is the one mentioned in this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If that's not it, link me to it so I know what you are rambling about.
Before I invest another minute, I need to see proof of what you are asking, to ensure you aren't just a lunatic.

originally posted by: turbonium1
So far, you have no proof of these two planes being commercial flights.

That's what you still need to show me, now.


Prove it, or admit you cannot prove it.

I'm confused about what you are actually saying (specifically). You asked us this a few pages back:

originally posted by: turbonium1

Look at the ACTUAL flight paths from Atlanta or Detroit to Tokyo, on the flight finder link above. The actual planes fly NOWHERE NEAR VANCOUVER.

These are the very same planes being claimed to fly 12 miles south of Vancouver. Making up a 'map' does not exactly constitute proof, of any kind.

In response to this, I linked flight paths (taken from "Flightradar24") showing flights from Chicago and New York to Tokyo and Seoul that fly within 10 or 20 miles of Vancouver and YVP Airport -- and 10 to 20 miles is well within range for seeing a plane, or a contrail.


So now you are asking this:

originally posted by: turbonium1

Have you seen the video? The trails estimated to be over YVR, in Richmond?

I live, and work, in Richmond, near YVR, btw

Anything else?

I'm not sure which video you mean, but here is the one in this thread that shows contrails visible from Vancouver:


You say that the planes are directly over you, but none of the contrails in the video are directly over the observer in the video. They look to be about 15 to 20+ miles away (ground distance) -- which is about how far away the planes flying to Asia were that I showed on the "Flightradar24" flight paths. That estimated distance is based on the fact the fact that the contrails are about half the way from the horizon to "straight up".

So the contrails in the video could easily have been made from those planes from places like Chicago and New York that fly close to Vancouver on their way to Tokyo and Seoul.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: dragonridr

400 pounds of smoke oil to do some skywriting.

Skywriting would be chemtrails of a sort when you think about it.

Smoke oil is burned through the engine usually paraffin based. So you also end up dumping fuel when you turn it on. So how much smoke oil do you think you would need to make say a contrail 5o miles long. To go from horizon to horizon would be impossible. Well unless of course it's just a normal contrail. Since water condensation I's all that's needed

I live near Palmdale like the OP. i notice the chemtrails on certain days that are crazy! They start aroumd 8 am and by 11 am we have gray skies. This happens on all kinds of temperatured days, but always a beginning clear blue sky . This is in no way scientific, but i pay attention to flight patterns above my house and on nonchemtrail days, planes stay in a parallel pattern above my house, but on chemtrail days they criss cross all over the sky above me. im sure this alone would be a great way to verify.

a reply to: SunnyDee


The temperature near the surface (i.e., where people live) does not matter for contrail production. At the altitudes that contrails are produced, it is always around -40 degrees, no matter the temperature near the ground. Therefore, it will always be cold enough at altitude for the water droplets condensing out of the invisible vapor in the atmosphere to freeze.

What matters more is relative humidity at those altitudes (which, again, could be relatively independent of relative humidity near the ground).



As for the criss-crossing patterns, there are high-altitude air navigation routes over Palmdale that criss-cross each other. This is a map of the "World Hi" airroutes near LA and Palmdale:




I looked at the time I was preparing this post to see if any planes were criss-crossing Palmdale, and sure enough there were (one plane heading west, one heading SE. Consider that this is just one moment in time; over the course of additional time, there could be more flights criss-crossing the area.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: turbonium1
So far, you have no proof of these two planes being commercial flights.

So far, you have no proof of planes flying over you.

That's what you still need to show me, now.

You still need to show US that planes fly over you, now.

Prove it, or admit you cannot prove it.

Prove that planes fly over you, or admit you cannot prove it.

You have seen the video shows two of these planes? The planes that YOUR SIDE estimated to be flying about 12 miles south of his position?

Do you know that would put these two planes directly over Richmond, and YVR?

If you don't accept anything here, you have never mentioned it, so I'll assume you accept it.

I could prove to you that I have lived in Richmond for over 30 years, but it'd be personal info, and that's off-limits. So unless you think I'm lying about where I live, you don't need proof of it.

So now, you know planes fly over Richmond, and you should realize that I lived in Richmond when these two planes flew over Richmond.

These two planes flew over Richmond, and if they didn't fly over my head, they were a few miles from me, at most.


Btw, you have never proved the planes were those two commercial flights.

All the same crap, because it has no proof...

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

I linked flight paths (taken from "Flightradar24") showing flights from Chicago and New York to Tokyo and Seoul that fly within 10 or 20 miles of Vancouver and YVP Airport -- and 10 to 20 miles is well within range for seeing a plane, or a contrail.


You say that the planes are directly over you, but none of the contrails in the video are directly over the observer in the video. They look to be about 15 to 20+ miles away (ground distance) -- which is about how far away the planes flying to Asia were that I showed on the "Flightradar24" flight paths. That estimated distance is based on the fact the fact that the contrails are about half the way from the horizon to "straight up".

So the contrails in the video could easily have been made from those planes from places like Chicago and New York that fly close to Vancouver on their way to Tokyo and Seoul.

No. The video shows two planes 12-20 miles south of him, which means the planes were flying directly over Richmond. As you know, I live in Richmond. The two planes flew within a 7 mile range of anyone in Richmond, at very most. Your estimate put the planes over Steveston area of Richmond, and my family lives a block away from Steveston.

Do you understand that these two planes would have been flying over me, or a few miles away, at most, if they were flying over Richmond?

There is nothing to debate about the planes being over Richmond. If I was driving north along, say, No.2 Road, at the time, these planes WOULD DEFINITELY have flown directly over me. Without even moving, they'd be just a few miles away, at very most.

See the point yet?


Where is the ACTUAL DATA for the flights you cited? Do you have it, or not? If you do, why haven't you shown it?
If you have no data, why talk about distances??

You showed me the data of planes flying near the Canadian border, which is the longitude and latitude data of the flight.

Why don't you show me the SAME data for the two planes flying over Richmond???

That is what I've been asking you to show me, over and over, and you just ignore it all, like nothing was asked of you.



DO YOU HAVE THE DATA, OR NOT?

The original claim is that these are all 'contrails'.

The NEXT claim is that they are not contrails.


So [contrails is the first claim, and has never been proven.

You act like it's already proven, demanding to see any proof of chemtrails!!!


What a joke..

For decades, nobody knew there were any 'persistent' contrails.

Because no contrail was 'persistent', all those years, nobody thought they existed, so nobody had to call them 'persistent'.

I don't know who first termed contrails as "persistent contrails", or when the term was coined.

Maybe it was first coined 10-15 years ago, but not much earlier, though.


You insist that we've had these same trails in the sky all along. The contrails were not as "persistent', back then, but by 2006, or so, trails became very persistent, all at once. So they needed to find an accurate term, and thus, "persistent contrails' came into existence!!


Nothing wrong with them newfangled trails, folks, let's move along

Another point -

The certainty of a contrail forming is not 100%.

These trails occur 100% of the time, which means they cannot possibly be contrails.


No matter how you spin it.