Fake Contrails

Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Ok, here's the thing - I've seen this stuff and it doesn't take a meteorologist or scientist or NASA to tell me what I'm seeing is odd.

Have you ever wondered why the tens of thousands of professional and amateur meteorologists around the world don't find it odd

And just because an "official source" says they are regular contrails that have been around for decades does not make it so.

No. But why presume otherwise. If NASA said thunderstorms had been occurring on earth for millions of years, would you believe them?

The official position on a lot of subjects is to deny, misdirect, obfuscate and sometimes flat out lie about it. U.S. citizens are currently witnessing miriad unexplainable phenomena that the official position is either silence, or denial. If our own government can lie, then NASA can lie,

And I can lie. And my friends can lie.

And do you really believe thunderstorms are natural?

And if you do some research on the subject before dismissing it from what you know - I'm assuming you're not a meteorologist, then you might find some things very odd with these streams...but I can't fully present a thorough argument here, stating all of the facts, but just state my position..

And I'm assuming you're not a meteorologist either I'm only an amateur (to be honest I'm more interested in photographing skyscapes and meteorological phenomena) but I have good friends who are professionals working for a number of major organisations, including the BBC and UK Met office

There may well be chemical spraying of the US population for all I know. But what you and others claim are chemtrails are just normal contrails

[edit on 18-9-2006 by Essan]

Hi, Essen. Thanks for your post. I like your first response, "Have you ever wondered why the tens of thousands of professional and amateur meteorologists around the world don't find it odd." It's a valid point. I haven't seen the position of these amateur or professional meteorologists to know either way. There could very well be a potent force from both sides thinking something is wrong, but I don't know either way...

Your second response to my contention that just because an "official source" says something doesn't mean one needs to believe it is just that. In this day and age, more and more skepticism about what we're being fed is not only healthy, but it's imperative. And one can reasonably assume that someone on the street that is sharing something that doesn't benefit him either way is more apt to tell a truth, as opposed to a government paranoid and power hungry sharing something that can only damage its reputation... common sense and reason must prevail...

Your third statement that you can lie is true. But seeing or experiencing something is the strongest and most personal form of truth there is. I'm not getting that information from anyone else; it's mine. And I trust my own sober, sound observation over anything else; taking, again, reason and common sense into account...

Re: your last statement, I am not a meteorologist. But I am seeing something I haven't seen before. I've never seen such a prevalence of rainbow colored clouds created by a jet engine. Scientifically and evidentially the verdict is out on this. The mainstream media has ignored this, NOT disproven it. There have not been scientific studies of these particular jet emissions, so given the government and corporations insidious history, and what I see as the unusual nature of these things, I have to weight on the side of them being a new phenomena. And I'm not saying they are chemicals, but the footprint they are leaving would suggest that...

You're right, I'm not a specialist. None of the people, or most of the people, witnessing strange phenomena are asking for investigation - that's all. They are concerned about their health. Period. I don't see what's wrong with that, and I don't feel the burden of proof of these things rests on the general population. We're not trained in these areas, that's why we have the CDC, FDA, EPA, etc., to make sure our environment and food supplies are safe and free of toxins. We're just voicing concern and are asking for more than a dismissive explanation for what it is we know we're seeing. And if these agencies don't see it or agree with it, their responsibility at the very least should be to say, "There's a concern here. Let's get some data to determine what this stuff is either way." This is the same sort of investiation people are asking for with regard to unidentified flying objects, which the Air Force has plenty of experience with - in particular, from chasing these objects out of restricted air space.

There is also a growing concern about cell phone towers being built right next to schools, from elementary to high school, and the fact that the emissions from these towers has not been fully studied or understood as far as long term effects. The philosophy here should be, maybe they do, maybe they don't, but why are we taking chances at all with the children going to school everyday by these things?

It's not that I know what these things are, I have a strong belief they may be chemicals, or some material (not ice) that creates a rainbow mist, and some people say has given them health problems, etc. All people interested in this phenomena are saying is who is flying these planes, where do they come from, why are they flying in patterns that according to FAA are considered wreckless flight paths, and what is the material that we see being ejected from these craft?

The official response so far has been silence, or that they are regular contrails. The unofficial civilian response is we want more than that...

Just because you've never seen it before doesn't make it either true, or bad. There are a lot of things we've never seen before. They're still natural or harmless.

As for wanting more, how can you get more? They're persistant contrails, what more can be said or proven about it? I can't see any reason to spend millions to get samples and do tests just to prove a relatively small crowd of people wrong.

Once you know how to spot irridescence ('rainbow coloured clouds') you'll find you see them all the time. They're common, but not obvious - most people, after all, don't go around staring at the sky (especially in the vicinity of the sun) all the time!

www.psi.edu...

antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov...

www.astro.uu.nl...

Unfortunately, all employed aeronautical engineers who could give actual measurements of exhaust temperatures have signed nondisclosure agreements similar to the commercial aircraft pilots; however, it may not be that all that technical. A first course in fluid dynamics should give a first approximation which any third-year engineering student could calculate.

Rofl.
Then I guess a number of my friends are a part of a conspiracy and that all the readings in cockpits are all fake.

I also guess that my friends homebuilt Lancair prop jet is making 'fake' contrails too

Here is a link to a photo that illustrates the primary difference between the two.
link

You know as well as I do that them jets are at diferant flight levels.

Here is a link to some terrific images of chemtrails (I feel that word is suitable, as these particular streams often have an oily, rainbow colored sheen that seems to be a characteristic chemical mixtures...metals? What else would look this way? And you can say ice crystals, but these are being sprayed at low altitudes and in extremely warm temperatures. Unless you're in Alaska or some colder location, which I have been, but even then you can't claim that ice crystals can survive long enough at low altitudes to spread out and form clouds that block the sun...)

ZOMG, a rainbow made of Ice Crystals.

If you are concerned, you can contact the closest airport tower or air traffic control center and ask to speak with the person in charge. Write down their name. Play concerned. Ask what all those big planes are doing flying over your town. If they reply that they don't know, you can tell them it's their job to know. If these are reg. airlines, ask for the specific airlines you are referring to. Also, it's probably illegal to fly several commercial airlines close together over populated areas in x formations, grid lines and criss-crossing patterns...

Do you know what jetways, SID and STARS are? They are like roads, many jets fly the same jetway. At intersections, most likely VORs planes criss cross.

If you don't like these intersections, to bad, it's for simplicity, the close formations are most often caused by multiple planes flying the same jetway/ star/ sit or maybe they're in a holding pattern.

Actually, air traffic centers should have an approximate if not exact temperature available to them at any given time...one would assume...

Isn't that what ATIS and weather radar is for?

Even if we were to exclude the temperature, or assume it was at -40f at its warmest, how can you still have a contrail spreading out into oily, rainbow-colored clouds that last for hours? The chemtrails often appear to be dripping, or the trail is interrupted in one or more spots, appearing to be broken, as if someone flipped a switch off, then back on. These trails often blanket out until they cover the entire sky(?).

It might last hours since multiple jets fly the same route over and over and over. We hired a boat to sleep in, and we had a hourly jet fly above our head. By the end of the day there was a cloud.

The flights creating these trails often fly in criss-crossing patterns or grid lines, and over highly populated areas. And this happens all over the world. I even saw photos of chemtrail activity over Iraq (here's one link showing this - www.astro.ku.dk...) Are you supposed to see miles' long contrails from space?

A couple of them looks like AWACS circling, the others I guess could be from multiple planes flying the same jetway.

Boeing is believe to be the plane of choice for the CIA operation laying down the contrails all over the world. How would I trust you to say that contrails exist and endanger this contract for your employer?

Boeing makes many types of jets not just a single 'plane'. Also you'd trust him since he knows what he's talking about. Unlike half the chemtrail beleivers .

However, here's a hypothetical: imagine a warm, sunny day. You look up and see a commercial airliner in front of you, close enough to clearly make out the body, and this craft is laying down a serious, thick, persistent trail that stretches for miles.

Now, at the same time you see, beyond this closer aircraft, another aircraft from your current angle that is easy to assume is higher up, which means it is colder, presumably, than the craft in front of you. Except the aircraft higher up is only leaving a short,

Find pictures of WW2 B-17s. Higher ones generated contrails, lower ones didn't, even though they were in a really, really, really big formation.

Clouds are not supposed to look like rainbows! Airline exhaust is not supposed to spread out into hazy clouds and block out the sun. When did commercial airline exhaust ever do that? It would be considered (and should be) a major health concern. Clouds are not supposed to drip. If you put on a certain pair of light toned sunglasses you can often even see a rainbow sheen on many clouds.

They did that since the 50's with the first high flying comercial jets. Contrails are slightly diferant from clouds, and in some conditions I've seen clouds looking like rainbows.

It's my belief that a lot of the cloud cover currently in our skies is manmade. Not only that, I am not comfortable at all that when it rains all of those chemicals, and whatever it is that composes those clouds comes dumping onto our food crops, water supplies...our bodies...

What you should do is go to the airport and find out if chemicals are getting put into planes other than fuel. I don't there there is, as I've asked many, many, many rampers.

A perfect example of multiple planes flying the same jetway is this:
www.airliners.net...
Leave that for an hour, boom, you have your chemtrail.

You've linked to close-up pictures of commercial aircraft spreading a contrail. But the contrail and chemtrail look virtually the same exiting the craft. When the contrail evaporates, however, and the chemtrail remains to spread out into hazy clouds is where they differ in nature.

Damn that person lives near a major VOR. That would suck.

216.117.143.63...
ROFL photochopped.

Of that site:

A Boeing 747 and a 767 both equipped with wing lets allowing for greater lift than what is possible with just a typical blunt end wing tip. There must be a paint job contest to determine which colors and schemes will allow for the greatest concealment of these planes and their interface with the attendant contrails so as to keep them hidden in plain sight. There is also the close approximation of these paint schemes to commercial carriers so that at a distance these guys don't stand out too much.

767s don't have winglets

216.117.143.63...
ZOMG, congratulations you spotted a cirrus cloud

It's bizarre. If they're just contrails - the same ones that have been around for decades, then why are they taking this stance? I think they really can't ignore it and have to address it, because these things are painted all over the skies and on satellite pics.

There are more planes in the sky than ever, so kids might be interested and find it amazing how much there are?

And just because an "official source" says they are regular contrails that have been around for decades does not make it so. The official position on a lot of subjects is to deny, misdirect, obfuscate and sometimes flat out lie about it. U.S. citizens are currently witnessing miriad unexplainable phenomena that the official position is either silence, or denial. If our own government can lie, then NASA can lie, what people like to call "credible" news sources can lie...it's all free game. If you believe everything you hear you're in for some surprises. I'll believe my own eyes.

That dosn't mean people at all the suppliers for all the thousands of aircraft in the world are lying. Nor does it mean the staff or the airlines are lying.

Members high up in our government, military, respected, credible citizens, etc., have come forward claiming they have either been abducted by, or have seen ufos. Almost four million people claim to have been abducted by ufos, but the official position on this subject is denial and moreso, silence. Does this mean it doesn't exist? I don't think so...

Allot of idiots think they've been aducted too I saw a science program where they linked abductions to electricity

I make no apologies when I say that our government and media do not have our interests at heart, and if they can fail the American public then it's all free game. If these entities have a history of censorship, concealment, obfuscation and betrayal of trust, how can anything they say hold up water? Or, I should say, how can anyone put absolute faith in what their hearing from these people over what they have personally witnessed...

No one should put absolute faith into the government, that dosn't mean they should question them on just about everything

but in my 30-something years, I've never seen contrails spread out into oily, hazy, rainbow-colored clouds - even shaped like clouds, blanket the sky and block out the sun.

They don't really block out the sun, they can just cause some cloud cover, which can cast a shadow on you for a few minutes. Contrails or Chemtrails whatever you want to call them, do occasionally the rainbow. It all depends on the conditions.

There are 300 million people in America, in one year they'd of lived many more years than a individual in there entire life, so they have a chance to photograph and see rare things like that

My point is that there is too much evidence against Chemtrails, allong with the fact that a coverup this size is impossible.

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Ok, here's the thing - I've seen this stuff and it doesn't take a meteorologist or scientist or NASA to tell me what I'm seeing is odd.

Have you ever wondered why the tens of thousands of professional and amateur meteorologists around the world don't find it odd

LMAO!

[edit on 26-9-2006 by PisTonZOR]

why are they flying in patterns that according to FAA are considered wreckless flight paths, and what is the material that we see being ejected from these craft?

Wreckless flightpaths? Huh? What material? Burnt fuel?

ok ....they do block out the sun...and not just a temp `shadow` as you put it.

you should try visiting somewhere that gets it nearly everyday. in places it goes from v sunny blue skies to a complete white out.

Piston, I mean no personal offense, but your responses are only general refutations, and seem to reflect a personal aversion to the subject more than honest, valid feedback. You don't cite any scientific, or any professional or credible information disproving and offering closure on the subject, but instead make general, limited statements about what you perceive to be air traffic patterns.

There is nothing there of any substance. Ultimately, statements such as, "Allot of idiots think they've been aducted too I saw a science program where they linked abductions to electricity." are speculative, insulting, empty statements and nothing more.

I've offered a number of links that anyone can simply read to get further information on the subject. The fact that the military and air traffic control centers have acknolwedged a "program" should serve to galvanize anyone even remotely interested in the subject.

Here is another link, which includes further verifiable, credible sources for further information.

Wikepedia

You said, "No one should put absolute faith into the government, that dosn't mean they should question them on just about everything." Maybe we should...

[edit on 26-9-2006 by OnTheDeck]

[edit on 26-9-2006 by OnTheDeck]

[edit on 26-9-2006 by OnTheDeck]

I guess you're right . Sorry.

But I still think Contrails are real and chemtrails aint

Why don't the debunkers here just come out and say that people that believe in contrails are insane and trying to create a definite threat to the system that they so enjoy the fruits of? You have done everything else but that.. I know what I see with my eyes and I know the difference between a plane spraying and a plane just flying by. There is reams of evidence on the internet to indicate the difference between the two outcomes but the debunkers would love at any effort to confuse those that do not want to believe their own eyes and who are sucked into the various hypostatis of science: don't let anybody know that we don't know it all.

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Why don't the debunkers here just come out and say that people that believe in contrails are insane and trying to create a definite threat to the system that they so enjoy the fruits of?

Well, if the shoe fits. . . .

I know what I see with my eyes and I know the difference between a plane spraying and a plane just flying by.

So, you admit that you have no real physical evidence to support your belief.

There is reams of evidence on the internet to indicate the difference between the two outcomes

Do you mean stuff like journal articles, scientific, peer reviewed papers or anything like that?

but the debunkers would love at any effort to confuse those that do not want to believe their own eyes and who are sucked into the various hypostatis of science: don't let anybody know that we don't know it all.

Spoken like a true Ludite.