Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausible, and Meteorologically Innacurate

And here is a picture of what 'CHEMTRAILS' look like from up above... just in case yout think their contrails.
Here

Maybe you should do some research before assuming a cloud formation is a chemtrail..

This photograph, taken June 18 from a Japan Coast Guard aircraft off the northeastern coast of Hokkaido, shows a bird’s-eye view of cloud streets over the Sea of Okhotsk. According to the Sapporo Meteorological Observatory, these low-altitude stratocumulus clouds were rolled into long, distinctive ribbons after becoming trapped in air currents. While it is not uncommon for wind to form such patterns in stratocumulus clouds, photos that clearly show the clouds rolled into strips are rare, says the observatory.

from Cloud Streets

[edit on 18-3-2009 by sensfan]

[edit on 18-3-2009 by sensfan]

[edit on 18-3-2009 by sensfan]

reply to post by weedwhacker


Real world science eh ? RIIIIIGGGGHHT. Is that the same science that told us the economy was in fine shape and not to worry before the economic crisis took everyone to the cleaners ?

Long before the raptor claimed super cruise as a first , the English electric lightning was already doing it .

You know ,if you deniers keep flying through my chaff long enough you are going to paint yourselves for what you really are . Because common sense tells honest people that raw data can mean anything you want it to if you spin it .

Like mark twain said ' there's lies ,damn lies and governement statistics '.

Next time your at an airshow , ask yourself what effective zero gravity would do for your average boieng bus let alone military craft.

I have nothing but admiration for civvilians that have the courage and common sense to see through techno blather and call a spade a spade.
We need more such people if democracy is to survive the predations of zionism and their unfortunate namesake ,the f22.

So lets all toast the new airbus and in time lets hope ,the resurected concorde program to which so many of my anonymous family have dedicated themselves without thanks or recognition.

reply to post by sensfan


So great , a pretty picture of a contrail. Nothing wrong with that . But when does a con become obvious for something other than.

Everybody though bernie madoff was safe as houses a couple of years back.

*Snip*

Mod Edit: Uncivil Discourse Removed: Review This Link: Civility And Decorum Are Required on AboveTopSecret.com

[edit on 3/18/2009 by semperfortis]

reply to post by reconpilot


I haven't a clue what your last 2 posts are about, but my post is in reply to the post before mine which linked a video showing these long cloud like formations, which he said were chemtrails. I was just showing that they were in fact regular clouds.

And I find this statement very offensive by the way...and I am not your "babe"

Next time you drive off road babe you will see what happens when particulate matter sticks to your lovely(car) body. Then tell me its your tin of foundation that got spilled out the window while you were making up in your rear view mirror.

although I still haven't a clue what you are talking about.


[edit on 18-3-2009 by sensfan]

STET

[edit on 3/18/0909 by weedwhacker]

Click here for more information.

reply to post by sensfan


BUT HAVING SAID THAT . You do have a valid point . Sure ,some chem is confused with con and with so many variables in the mix (excuse pun) thats not to be unexpected .

Nevertheless , while the debate is stifled by the either or parameters you will not get nearer the truth .

All I can say is that in my conversations with family who are pilots both mil and civ there are no illusions about some contrails being a lot more than just water vapour .

The world is at war ,the stakes have never been higher and the consequences of a serious breach in airspace security are to horrifying to contemplate . The war never really ends , it just oscilates between warm hot and cold . sad but true .

'Window' was no illusion during the bombing raids .It was a very primitive countermeasure by modern standards but its a fact nonetheless .

Now you have the added problems of escalating climate change on top of scarce resources .Its a powder keg of international tension.

Oz has Huge reserves of mineral resources that other nations would give their eye teeth to acquire by fair means or foul. There is no difference between business and war .

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
Very hard to believe.
See? I knew it ...! (Clue for you: the remark about Patton was an obvious joke, as he himself couldn't be the actor...)

Not really, I assume that was supposed to be some kind of joke, but I really don’t get the humor of it. Maybe it’s a language barrier thing, but you have made several remarks that I cannot make heads or tails out of. If your implying that photo was of the REAL Patton, I think I made it pretty clear in my original post that it pulled that screen capture from the DVD movie Patton, off my computer using Media Player and MSPaint.

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
Now I have YOU. Just read my full statement on page 16 and then your dodging answer to it. I gave an exact explanation why that one contrail is no prove at all (see above, I reinserted it to match the original post).

You have nothing. That trail is not intentional, it is listed as a movie blooper, and a very well known blooper at that. If it had been intentional, then director would have stated this.

I supposed you think this well known blooper was also intentional:

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
PS I was being very polite refraining from using the word "nonsense" regarding your post. No problem for me to change that. But MOD don't blame me then...

You have been sarcastic from your first post, and made even worse remarks, don’t try and act all innocent now. Examples:

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
No, thefreepatriot didn't miss anything and his posts are convincing. It's you willing to clutch at any straw to "prove" an outlandish theory ('My dear gullibles, it's only contrails, be happy....'):

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
No evidence either. Do we always have to explain the basics to the "debunkers" ... ?

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
Did good old Patton die of brain cancer? No. So these weren't "contrails" (as you define them...).

PS:
You don’t like me calling Chemtrails Nonsense, well you better get used to it because they are exactly that IHMO…

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody

Originally posted by defcon5
.... Are you accusing me of altering the photo? I don’t think I much care for that accusation, sir. I have a track record here on ATS of telling the truth, and presenting facts...

Not at all, sir. There is no reason to understand I meant you, really. I was only referring to the many disinfo sites/pages on the web sometimes often doing such. I declare that I do not believe you are somebody who would alter a photo.

I stated in the first post of that photo that I screen captured it directly from the DVD movie. So it did not come from some supposed disinfo site.

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
"Jet contrails"? The issue of this thread isn't jet contrails, but the strange prodigy of THICK, DENSE, EXPANDING, LINGERING "contrails". Thus the mentioning of just "contrails" is meaningless. We should know what those movies actually depict. And I doubt they do that.

We'll see when I get the movie in and can take some screen captures of it.

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
- The sky at about 0:57-1:00 is well within the scope of a regular cloudy sky, just with some longish clouds. There is ONE trail-like objekt near the upper right corner, which can easily be explained, as in my 1st post on page 16.

- The same goes for the sky at 1:23.
Terribly sorry, but this video ain't no evidence.

Its evidence that I did not Photoshop the chemtrail into the photo as you originally accused me of doing. Also, you are looking at a couple of screen captures, and a few seconds of that scene in the trailer, why not get the full movie and look at that instead. You can pick it up at walmart or amazon very cheaply.

Originally posted by MyNameIsNobody
For the “breaking” of the “sound barrier" it was necessary to “overload” the plane engines. Under such special circumstances the combustion becomes an ‘unclean’ combustion, producing more smoke than usually, consisting inter alia of not completely/cleanly burnt carbon particles. It can also occur under such extreme conditions that a considerable part of the (jet)fuel gets projected backwards without having been burnt (‘incomplete’ combustion). Such “deficiencies” were typical of non-modern engines.

Funny…
F-16’s used to do Touch-and-Goes, hitting their afterburners at the end of our runway, and shooting straight up thousands of feet, never once did they leave any smoke or contrail behind them when they did this.


BTW why do you insist on breaking up my post across multiple other posts? Why not respond to the entire thing in one post. Its getting almost as annoying as your overuse of Bold Text, funny how that mimics many of the crazier Chemtrail websites out there. What is the idea behind that? Is it supposed to mean that what you say should have deeper effect by using bold and large fonts? If what you are saying is worth reading you should not have to use such tactics other then to point out pieces of importance.

reply to post by defcon5


defcon5....u2u!

Second line.....

OK

Last Warning

It seems that Common Sense and Courtesy is not going to get it done, so here it is..

From this point on, if you ...

1. Attack another member
2. Post about another member and not the Topic
3. Make Snide Comments

Your post will be removed and you will be warned. No Matter How Much Of The Rest Of Your Post Is On Topic..

I sincerely hope everyone understands this because the insulting and uncivilized posting is stopping now.

Thank you

Semper

[edit on 3/18/2009 by semperfortis]

reply to post by semperfortis


Well then, hopefully Ozweatherman will come back to again, with help from his supporters, show once again, through valid science (and not "pseudo-science") how the concept of the 'Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausible, and Meterologically Innacurate'

Let us hit the 'reset' button...here and now....

OZ...you have the floor.....!

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by semperfortis

 

Well then, hopefully Ozweatherman will come back to again, with help from his supporters, show once again, through valid science (and not "pseudo-science") how the concept of the 'Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausible, and Meterologically Innacurate'

Let us hit the 'reset' button...here and now....

OZ...you have the floor.....!

Why does he have to do it again? Are you ignoring all the evidence he did present, as well as the evidence from others? IF so, why? Because it doesn't fit your theory?

We all know I love this topic, and I love to take pictures of chemtrails.

I was out at the park with my sister walking today, and you guessed it, the skies were full of activity! trails being laid all over the place. We were there for an hour, and observed over twenty planes, watched several grids being laid, the usual for an active trail day.

But today's observance was different.

I was watching the sky with the knowledge I learned from Oz, about the atmospheric conditions for contrails, and heights of planes, etc. I have to say, when he told me contrails were actually used as a predictor of rain, it made sense, because I often noticed it rained after a day of heavy trails.

Being able to watch the skies with a bit of real scientific fact in your mind, is awesome. We sat in the park, our heads to the sky, watching and discussing the trails. In the hour we were there, we saw the progression from tiny thread line to spread out full hazy mess. It feathered a lot today, and I would wager to attribute it to the wind.

There is rain coming this evening, if the weather man had not said so, I would feel confident wagering so!

YET, even though I can now be more intelligent in my observations, does this mean I dont have questions or wonder about chemtrails? Oh yes I still do! I have a lot.

But I have to say I appreciate the information from both sides of this debate, and I am not convinced that what I see in my skies is anything normal or safe at all. But I do know that atmospheric conditions have to be ripe for the trails to form and linger, and it rains after they do. Does this mean there is not a sinister undertone to chemtrails? Of course not. I do think weather modding is going on, and maybe or maybe not what is being deposited in our skies is harmful.

I posted a thread about teens sending a balloon to space. Well, I wish I could send up a balloon to get samples of a lingering contrail! That is what we need to start doing, taking air samples. But how?? How can a normal, armchair chemtrail enthusiast, take samples that would help validate/disprove our theories??

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether

Here is an article by a Cdn journalist that sites some of the concern by ATC in Cda.

Here

Yes, the supposed Canadian Control tower guys, and their guests watching US tankers spray chemtrails….
I am sorry to inform you that story is hoax. It has numerous holes in it that do not match up with reality (more like someone who once saw an ATC center on a TV show). One of the first that I can recall is the writer stating that he was inside with the ATC controllers, then they walked outside to watch it from the tower in person. Only a layman with no knowledge of how ATC is laid out would make such a claim, because in a real control tower (unlike the movies), only Approach, Taxi, and Departure control are in the tower. The ATC guys who would control planes that far off site, are either in a building below the tower, or they are in a building offsite completely. Towers are only used where they need to confirm things visually; that being Approaches, Departures, and Taxi Clearance.

That is just one flaw from that article, I can think of off the top of my head. If you can find the original, please post it so we can go over the other holes in the story.

Additionally if you notice that site:

William Thomas:
Author, Journalist, Lecturer, Film Maker

Translation: He makes money on this conspiracy theory…
Further Translation: He cannot present an objective opinion as he is using this topic as a source of income.

reply to post by defcon5


Thank your for your response and for questioning my source... I would tend to believe that journalist as I haven't seen anything that is against his reporting and also I would tend to believe him and the others I've linked to before I'd believe a website such as contrailscience where their hole agenda is to debunk chemtrails. Kinda like having someone go to the whitehouse website for actually what the government is doing to you.

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Why can't the debunkers show me a still from a pre-1998 film, TV program or commercial with a background that looks like this?

I provided quotes to where you can find these types of bloopers in movies, that is sufficient.

Quotes? BFD. If you're gonna spend half your life trying to debunk chemtrails, let's see a screen shots from ANY pre-1998 film, TV show or commercial that shows these "persistent contrails" in the background. NOT a Hollywood SFX sequence.

Is that really asking too much? Put up or shut up.

Now this I find very amusing. Once proven, the poster fades away into the sunset while the next guy jumps on a completely different bandwagon.

Proven? Are you kidding me? Defcon5 claims that these so-called "persistent contrails" (chemtrails) have been around since the 1920s, but when challenged to come up with a pre-1998 film, TV program or commercial to prove it, all he can produce is a black-and-white movie poster and a scene from Patton with ONE real contrail in the background?

So these "persistent contrails" have been around for 80 years, but no one can find JUST ONE background scene shot before 1998 that looks like this?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/5befcb2e00a93b42.jpg[/atsimg]
Hey hotbakedtater, these chemtrails were shot in Louisville!


[edit on 18-3-2009 by GoldenFleece]

reply to post by AllTiedTogether


You don't have to look very far to see that he is not a journalist, but just a guy that will jump on the bandwagon of any conspiracy theory he sees to try to make a buck of gullible people.

[edit on 19-3-2009 by sanctum]

Let me post this one more time

Please note this!!!

OK

Last Warning

It seems that Common Sense and Courtesy is not going to get it done, so here it is..

From this point on, if you ...

1. Attack another member
2. Post about another member and not the Topic
3. Make Snide Comments

Your post will be removed and you will be warned. No Matter How Much Of The Rest Of Your Post Is On Topic..

I sincerely hope everyone understands this because the insulting and uncivilized posting is stopping now.

Thank you

Semper

reply to post by GoldenFleece



Great! They also use movie boards for movies and expect that to indicate a chemtrail. If it's in a movie then it's probably there on purpose... They could put jet trails in the sky on purpose you know.... Sky writing... To enable a jet or other aircraft to be followed during a test or to maybe fake a contrail picture.... I mean the question isn't are they doing this... because the government has admitted to this numbers of times that have been provided earlier in this thread. The question is why are they spraying 'chemicals' or chemtrails on the populations of the world? To deny the governments already admitted policy of spraying the population of the country is truly unpatriotic if you ask me. What ever country you live in....

Thanks HotBakedTater... Great posts...

Rgds