Painting the sky..(pics)

Ah, the so-called "mega sprayer" or what the rest of the world called a areodynamic contrail casued by the movement of the air over the wings. kind of like thi s?


BTW, I thought that the chemtrail theory was that they didn't start "spraying until the late 1990's? Don't most of the Chemmies claime that they never saw contrails before that?



[Edited on 6-12-2003 by HowardRoark]

The aerodynamic contrail is produced by the momentary reduction of pressure resulting from the flow of air past an airfoil. Since it is of short duration, it is not considered an operational hazard.
The key word here is short lived! Usually the only time you see an aerodynamic contrail is in very high angles of attack(fighters and aerobatic planes), or in big planes when they are low and slow and in a transition phase of flight when the conditions are right. You will not get aerodynamic contrails when straight and level and at a constant speed during flight.

They are short lived at lower altitudes.

If the conditions are right for a aerodynamic contrail to form over the entire wing surface in the upper altitudes, they are more than ripe for the formation of a persistant contrail from the engine exhaust. The two just mixed in the turbulance behind the plane and became one big trail.

HowardRoark,
Thank you for the pictures. In the description of one photo, they call it "An oblique view of unique cloud patterns over the Pacific Ocean caused by
aircraft contrail". Unique. Those pictures were taken from the sky, which certainly has an effect on perception.

I am not disputing the existence of contrails. I've seen aircraft form contrails since I was a child. In fact, yesterday I saw, what appeared to be, a commercial aircraft with a thin contrail that vanished out of my sight within a few minutes.

The aircraft that formed the trails in my pictures were flying much lower than the aircraft yesterday. Their flight patterns were irregular, with one craft nearly playing 'chicken' with the other.

You mentioned 'chemmies' not reporting 'chemtrails' until the late 90's...That's interesting that you've attached a term to people that notice irregularities with these trails. Anyhow, I've read about biological weapons being formed in the 50's-60's that would produce a cloud over a city.

In the 1950's and 1960's, both the U. S. and Soviet biological weapons programs developed techniques to disperse plague by aerosol means resulting in pneumonic plague. This form of plague would be extremely lethal and potentially contagious. The World Health Organization estimated that, in a worst case scenario, dispersing 50 kg of Y. pestis as an aerosol cloud over a city of 5 million, could cause 150,000 cases of pneumonic plague, resulting in up to 100,000 hospitalizations and 36,000 deaths.

link

You see, it's not unheard of to disperse something into the sky. I'm not suggesting that they are spraying the plague. I am, however, suggesting that they ARE spraying something.

I advise each of you to watch the sky for irregularities and judge for yourself. Awareness is the key to resolution!!!

I don't know much about contrails, but I found this link www.clydelewis.com... Looks interesting.

Originally posted by Bangin

The aircraft that formed the trails in my pictures were flying much lower than the aircraft yesterday. Their flight patterns were irregular, with one craft nearly playing 'chicken' with the other.

How were you able to judge the altitude?

Have you ever heard of "Flight Explorer?"

You mentioned 'chemmies' not reporting 'chemtrails' until the late 90's...That's interesting that you've attached a term to people that notice irregularities with these trails.

uh huh, nice try. but I suspect you know exactly what I am talking about. wink, wink, nudge, nudge

Originally posted by HowardRoark
How were you able to judge the altitude?

Have you ever heard of "Flight Explorer?"

Perhaps I should have said they 'appeared' lower.

"Flight Explorer?" Not until now. I just ran a search.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
uh huh, nice try. but I suspect you know exactly what I am talking about. wink, wink, nudge, nudge

Actually, I don't know what you're talking about. I found it interesting that you referred to people questioning these trails as 'chemmies'. I've never seen that term before.

HowardRoark, I'm not here to misinform people. I have typed all that I can regarding this event. Even after a few of you folks have posted your thoughts, the event is STILL unusual to me.

I have my suspicions about these trails and apparently you do not.

Let's agree to disagree.

Oh goody! We have a disinfo spook here to shoot us all down!

Who do you work for?

Now on to the facts.

Contrails dissipate faster no matter where they originate from nor the type of plane or the era they were photographed.

Two you did not produce any photos showing the mass sprayers that emit from the entire tail of a plane.

Furthermore there are many patents that people have dug up that show such devices likely exist. People have come forward as mechanics saying they have worked on such projects and have been threatened even though they work for private contractors.

THENEO: Must you call everyone who has a differnt opinion a disinfo spook? That's pretty lame. HowardRoark is just giving the facts he knows (and i hope he continues). In order to discuss and debate over a subject you have to have 2 differnt apposing views or else the discussion just won't get anywhere.

Some people like to form an opinion by seeing two sides of the argument and form there own opinion on the subject. Rather than being told what to believe.

And THENEO. Could you supply some links for the things you mention? We wouldn't want some one to come along and call you a misinfo spook now would we? (sorry i couldn't help myself )

Anyway I just felt that needed to be said. I don't mean to drag this offtopic.

[Edited on 7-12-2003 by jra]

When you are not the best informed on a subject then you do not have the right to act like you are an expert.

It is called courtesy.

Frankly when you attack others and put them down based upon incomplete knowledge on a subject then you deserve a potshot IMHO.

The board exists for people to share and learn and there will always be opinions, true. But you have to have the ability to defend them too.

Also due to the nature of the general topic that this board covers being Conspiracy' one has to accept that proof is hard to come by and subject to scrutiny. This ain't the science channel. On the other hand the science channel ain't run by the people either...

I sometimes get annoyed when the mods here allow rookies and cranks to attack people that are trying to do the right thing and they paint both sides with the same brush. That is unfair and something that happens a lot here.

Anyways my struggle to improve ATS continues...

Now on to the topic at hand,

If you want to really know whether Chemtrails exist do some more homework and then we will discuss the finer' details of this subject which I am able to get down and dirty with anyone here. I used to post a chemtrail watch on the web 4 years ago on a regular basis when few people even knew what the heck they were.

I challenge you to prove that they are just smoke or condensation from planes with known commercial operations or routine military or spook activities.

Originally posted by THENEO
Oh goody! We have a disinfo spook here to shoot us all down!

Who do you work for?

LOL. I know I am winning a debate when the ad hominem attacks start.

Now on to the facts.

Contrails dissipate faster no matter where they originate from nor the type of plane or the era they were photographed.

So look closely at the following photograph. Note hoe the B17s at the lower altitude are barely emitting contrails if they are at all. Note how the one contrails from the plane just above the photographer are rapidly dissipating. Then look at the contrails from the planes at higher altitudes. Note how they are not disipating rapidly, are they chemtrails? Were chemtrails a part of the 8th Army�s arsenal?







Furthermore, if, based on your assertion, the ice crystals that condense out of a plane exhaust always disipate, then how is it that cirrus clouds (ice crystals) form? If they are ice crystals just like contrails then they should dissipate also, or never even form in the first place.

Two you did not produce any photos showing the mass sprayers that emit from the entire tail of a plane.

Why? I am not trying to prove that chemtrails exist, you are.

Furthermore there are many patents that people have dug up that show such devices likely exist.

I bet you could have a lot of fun poking around the patent office files for patents on goofy items that never saw the light of day.

Frankly, the technology is so basic, why would anyone take out a patent on something that would likely be top secret and risk disclosing the secret?

People have come forward as mechanics saying they have worked on such projects and have been threatened even though they work for private contractors.

Oh, please, please, provide the backup for this statement. (I know where you got that from and I know why you won�t post it. )

Originally posted by THENEO
When you are not the best informed on a subject then you do not have the right to act like you are an expert.

It is called courtesy.

I guess you are saying that I am not an expert, but that you are?

Frankly when you attack others and put them down based upon incomplete knowledge on a subject then you deserve a potshot IMHO.

Please let me know where I "attacked" someone based on "incomplete" knowledge. I will be sure to provide more knowledge for you next time.

The board exists for people to share and learn and there will always be opinions, true. But you have to have the ability to defend them too.

I agree. Please be prepared to defend the chemtrail theory with verifiable data and generally accepted scientific principles.

Also due to the nature of the general topic that this board covers being Conspiracy' one has to accept that proof is hard to come by and subject to scrutiny. This ain't the science channel. On the other hand the science channel ain't run by the people either...

I sometimes get annoyed when the mods here allow rookies and cranks to attack people that are trying to do the right thing and they paint both sides with the same brush. That is unfair and something that happens a lot here.

Anyways my struggle to improve ATS continues...

Now on to the topic at hand,

If you want to really know whether Chemtrails exist do some more homework and then we will discuss the finer' details of this subject which I am able to get down and dirty with anyone here. I used to post a chemtrail watch on the web 4 years ago on a regular basis when few people even knew what the heck they were.

I challenge you to prove that they are just smoke or condensation from planes with known commercial operations or routine military or spook activities.

No, that is not how it works. You are making the assertion that they are not condensation, therefore you must provide the proof to support your claim.




[Edited on 7-12-2003 by HowardRoark]

If they spread gasoline into the air forming chemical clouds, what would happen if or when they start raining? And someone lit up a cigarette? Wouldn't the air start burning?!?! Such a scenario would scare the #e out of me, that's for sure..... Has anyone an idea who is behind this? May God hold the rain back if this if my assumptions are true, but may God's will happen, not mine, no matter how horrible it seems, for Judgement is here real soon. Is someone actually trying to make fire fall down from the sky?

Blessings,
Mikromarius

HowardR,

before I go into detail about my side of the story,

I have one question for you,

Why are you so obviously desparate to prove me and others here Wrong?

even if it means being emotional about it?

THENEO: Didn't you just say...

I challenge you to prove that they are just smoke or condensation from planes with known commercial operations or routine military or spook activities.

And now you are complaining that HowardRoark here is doing that very same thing to which you challenged?

Anyways... I was doing some research myself for the last while. I came across this. It's a document from September 1942 on the formation of contrails and how best to hide them, so that the enemy wouldn't be able to spot a formation of aircraft from far away.

naca.larc.nasa.gov...

I found it to be a good read.

When I ask questions I expect people to answer them.

They do not have to but it would be polite to do so.

Originally posted by THENEO
HowardR,

before I go into detail about my side of the story,

I have one question for you,

Why are you so obviously desparate to prove me and others here Wrong?

even if it means being emotional about it?

Neo, all I have done is to simply point out that there are some basic scientific principles at work hear that quite simply and effectively account for the phenomena that you have observed.

My only emotion on this subject so far has been amusement (if you can call that an emotion). It seems to me that you are the one getting al worked up and defensive.

I realize that this is a conspiracy board. But that does not obligate me to blindly accept and believe every conspiracy theory presented here, does it?

All I ask is for some basic plausibility.

I realize that Occam�s razor may be antithema to a good conspiracy theory, but I personally find it useful.

I�ll grant that you may be right about one thing, however. I am passionate about one thing. No it is not debunking Chemtrails, although that ties in with it.

I hate willful ignorance, especially when it comes to matters of science.

I am not talking about lack of education, I am talking about a willful disregard, contempt, even, that some people have toward the physical sciences.

I would not fault someone who has never had the background or the opportunity to study and understand science for not understanding the basic principles of science. A native of the Amazonian rainforest would be a good example here.

But, say what you will about the educational system in America, you can not deny that there exists the opportunity and even the basic requirements for scientific studies from kindergarten up through high school, and beyond.

I do realize that science is not everyone�s thing and that some people may not have applied themselves to their studies as much as they should have. To those people I say:

�Fine, these things are not that difficult to understand. One of the wonders of the internet is that one can revisit and study subjects at your own pace. You can find pages and pages that outline the basic concepts of science at any level of understanding. Go out and read up on the subject.�

What I absolutely detest is those who exhibit an unwillingness to learn, those who promote a flawed or erroneous version of their world view as a scientific fact.

This is what I call �willful ignorance.�

Among those who I classify in this group are those who believe in or promote in spite of all evidence to the contrary any one of the following:

Creationism
Chemtrails
Scalar weapons (i.e. Tom Bearden)
zero point energy (Tesla)
Orgone energy (Reich)
New age crystals
Water with �special vibrations�
HAARP is evil
Cell towers are evil
And so on.

Are you one of those, or do you truly wish to understand the truth behind the phenomena that you observe, even if it means that your pet theory may be wrong?

Back to the subject at hand. Neo, since you have been studying �chemtrails� for these fast few years, maybe you can enlighten us on a few basic concepts

1. Cirrus clouds generally form at high altitudes and consist of small ice crystals. Why is it that cirrus clouds can form and persist, yet it is a given tenet of the chemtrail theory that contrails must always dissipate rapidly after forming? Please explain how it is that the atmospheric conditions that allow a cirrus cloud to form don�t apply to a contrail?
   
   
2. Can you define the term relative humidity?
   
   
3. How is the relative humidity with respect to water different from the relative humidity with respect to ice?
   
   
4. How does the relative humidity change for a given air mass if the temperature of that air mass is lowered?
   
   
5. How about if you lower the atmospheric pressure?
   
   
6. Can the relative humidity ever exceed 100%?
   
   
7. What is the �dry bias?�
   
   
8. If a jet airplane consumes 200 lbs of fuel (assume that the fuel is pure toluene) per hour (assume 90% combustion efficiency), and the plane is traveling at 400 miles per hour at 40,000 feet, how much water is being released per foot?
   
   
9. Assume that the ambient temperature is -45 degrees F, that the exhaust rapidly cools down to the ambient temperature. If the ambient relative humidity with respect to ice is 98%, (outside the exhaust plume) is the relative humidity inside the exhaust plume likely to exceed 100%?
   
   
   
   Certainly these questions should be easy for someone who is an �expert� like yourself to answer.
   
   What do you say, folks, will Neo:
   
   
   
   
   1. Answer the questions (or at least try to);
      
      
   2. Attack HowardRoark for being a �paid disinfo agent� (and ignore the questions);
      
      
   3. Try to get HowardRoark banned from the board, (and ignore the questions) or;
      
      
   4. Change the subject (and ignore the questions)?
      

Here's an article on chemtrails:

alberta.indymedia.org...

�Chemtrails� also appear in House Resolution 2977. Introduced last October by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, this bill called for the peaceful uses of space, and a ban on �exotic weapons�. Section 7 of the �Space Preservation Act of 2001� sought specifically to prohibit �chemtrails�.

Kucinich recently told the Columbus Alive newspaper (Jan. 24, 2002) that despite official denials, as head of the Armed Services oversight committee he is well acquainted with chemtrail projects. �The truth is there�s an entire program in the Department of Defense, �Vision for 2020,� that�s developing these weapons,� Kucinich told reporter Bob Fitrakis. The U.S. Space Command�s 2020 vision calls for �dominance� of space, land, sea and air.

Canadians were the first to complain about chemtrails to their federal government. On Nov. 18, 1999, NDP Defense critic Gordon Earl petitioned Parliament on behalf of 550 residents of Espanola, Ontario to �repeal any law that would permit the dispersal of military chaff or of any cloud-seeding substance whatsoever by domestic or foreign military aircraft without the informed consent of the citizens of Canada thus affected.�

According to CBC Newsworld (Aug 29, 1999), �Many in the community have reported respiratory problems and strange aches and pains. Town council heard that some believe military jets are dropping material over the town as part of a weather experiment� - after laboratory tests confirmed the presence of aluminum in rainwater falling through chemtrails over Espanola five-times higher than provincial health safety limits.

The first break in an investigation begun by the Environment News Service in Jan. 1999, came 11 months later when Victoria airport authority Terry Stewart returned a call to a Victoria resident concerned about the X�s and grid patterns being laid over the B.C. capitol. �It�s a military exercise, a U.S. and Canada air force exercise that�s going on,� Stewart reported on Dec. 8, 2000. �They wouldn�t give me any specifics on it.�

The article touches up on other points and has an interesting 'grid' like picture of chemtrails.

Jeez, that is old news. Kucinich dropped the word Chemtrail from the bill shortly thereafter. He claimed that "no one from his staff really new what chemtrails were" (approximate quote, but the gist of it. It doesn't say much for his qualifications to be a representative if he is going about introducing bills without knowing what is in them ).

As to the other reference, Isn't it possible, or even probable, that the military exercise referred to was the flights themselves, and not the contrails that they left behind?

In other words, if the Canadian air force was probably conducting training exercises with numerous planes flying specified patterns for various tactical reasons. The fact that they were leaving contrails all over the place was probably not a big deal in terms of the training goals.

Old news is no longer relevent?

HowardRoark, there's more to this and somehow I feel as if you know about it. Perhaps that's the paranoia kicking in. I've ran search after search on google and this is one hot topic. If these 'chemmies' have all lost their minds then so be it. I, for one, am going to continue my research and keep my eyes on the skies.