It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Originally posted by die_another_day
Hmmmm do we have a pilot here?
Maybe we should have someone collect contrail samples =D.
The only way to do this effectively is to use weather balloon data. There are thousands of balloons released each day that measure the atmospheric conditions. I can direct you to a website with raw data if you wish.
There are pilots here to, as well as aircraft mechanics
Scientific Context Due to substantial increase in air traffic over the globe, it is likely that a large amount of soot particles, sulfur compounds, and water vapor emitted from aircraft have infiltrated the upper atmosphere, causing increased frequency in the occurrence of contrails and contrail-induced cirrus clouds (Liou et al. 1990; Minnis et al. 2004). Figure 1 shows that, based on surface observations and satellite data, there is an upward trend of cirrus cloud cover over the past 50 years near U. S. flight corridors, and that this increase corresponds to the rising trend of jet fuel consumption. Although the overall coverage of contrails and contrail-cirrus clouds is much less than that of naturally formed cirrus clouds, their radiative effects are not negligible near the flight corridors where they occur most frequently. The assessment of impacts of increased cloud cover due to contrails requires the continuous characterization of contrails and their environment over their entire lifetimes.
Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by exposethosesecrets
Scientific Context Due to substantial increase in air traffic over the globe, it is likely that a large amount of soot particles, sulfur compounds, and water vapor emitted from aircraft have infiltrated the upper atmosphere, causing increased frequency in the occurrence of contrails and contrail-induced cirrus clouds (Liou et al. 1990; Minnis et al. 2004). Figure 1 shows that, based on surface observations and satellite data, there is an upward trend of cirrus cloud cover over the past 50 years near U. S. flight corridors, and that this increase corresponds to the rising trend of jet fuel consumption. Although the overall coverage of contrails and contrail-cirrus clouds is much less than that of naturally formed cirrus clouds, their radiative effects are not negligible near the flight corridors where they occur most frequently. The assessment of impacts of increased cloud cover due to contrails requires the continuous characterization of contrails and their environment over their entire lifetimes.
here is a bit from your PDF you linked. Check these things out a bit before you post them. This one is talking about a study to see if aircraft induced trails (con trails) have any effect on global warming. While I think global warming is a fantasy all by itself, this article has nothing to do with chemtrails. unless you want to admit that most if not all that you see in the sky is just con trails. Didn't think so.
Originally posted by exposethosesecrets
Interesting.
Richard Heene claimed to be an atmospheric scientist that released balloons to study the atmosphere.
Originally posted by exposethosesecrets
Let's take a look at prefix. Con vict. Con artist. Con trail.
What part of the con, do you feel is Pro?
Originally posted by exposethosesecrets
Chemtrails, chemistry 131 manual, fall 1990 [microform].
[Colorado Springs, Colo.?] : Dept. of Chemistry, U.S. Air Force Academy, [1990] [1990]
# Subjects Chemistry -- Study and teaching -- United States -- Handbooks, manuals, etc.
Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by exposethosesecrets
that is so conterproductive. What are they spraying on you anyways? What effects does it have on the health of the people in CO? And lastly, if the NWO plans on using Denver as their new HQ, why would they be spraying it?
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Originally posted by exposethosesecrets
Let's take a look at prefix. Con vict. Con artist. Con trail.
What part of the con, do you feel is Pro?
Here's one for you:
Contradiction
[edit on 19/10/2009 by OzWeatherman]
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by exposethosesecrets
Gee...do you even read the sourced material, or just look at titles???
Here's a snippet from just ONE document...
Previous studies of arctic aerosol have shown that (a) submicron mass concentrations exceeding 2 μg m-3 are often found in stratified layers at altitudes up to 9 km (Barrie 1986) throughout the Arctic during winter and early spring; (b) this aerosol is predominately
anthropogenic and transported from Europe and Asia (Shaw 1982, 1988; Norman et al. 1999);
(c) more efficient scavenging during late spring and early summer leads to much lower submicron mass concentrations, particularly within 1 km of the surface (Wylie and Hudson 2002); and (d) local new particle production from dimethyl sulfide and organic emissions from
open ocean water leads to higher number concentrations of ultrafine particles during summer than during winter (Ferek et al. 1995; Leck and Bigg 2005). Figure 1 shows the seasonal cycle of
the monthly average cycle of cloud emissivity, cloud coverage, and the fraction of time that polluted conditions occur using four years of ground-based aerosol and radiation observations
near Barrow, Alaska.
They are STUDYING the effects of both man-made pollution, and natural 'pollution' and how it is carried in the atmosphere over great distances. (NOW, if these co-called "chemtrails" are being shown in Barrow, Alska...maybe they're trying to kill off Sarah Palin?? If so, then I applaud their efforts...)
More:
2. Relevance to long-term goals of the DOE Office of Biological and Environmental Research
This field campaign would provide data needed to test aerosol and cloud retrievals and cloud models designed for application to global climate models. Evaluation of retrievals would improve confidence in long-term retrievals at the ACRF NSA locale, thereby extending the value
of the data beyond the campaign period. Reliable long-term retrievals are necessary for detecting aerosol indirect effects on clouds. Evaluation of both single-column and cloud-resolving models will improve confidence in cloud parameterizations used for simulations of climate change.
Arctic clouds have proven particularly difficult to simulate, at least in part because aerosol and IN effects on arctic clouds are extremely poorly understood. These data would fill the gap in the understanding needed to improve arctic cloud parameterizations.
Later, in another post, I see titles of books about chemistry...because somehow the term "chemtrails" is in the title, this is supposed to be conclusive "proof"??
Wouldn't it be better to actually read the books first?
Here's some homework for everyone...notice the word "anthropogenic" that I bolded up above?? Google it, and see what it means. How's that for some real research?
[edit on 19 October 2009 by weedwhacker]
Originally posted by zazzafrazz
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by exposethosesecrets
Thanks weed, why is this thread still going when you point this out?
Originally posted by superluminal11
Good work op. I have seen the Legislation about the chemtrails and space weaponry etc. Kay Bailey Hutchison was one of the authors I believe or involved with parts of it.
I honestly dont know about the debunkers of this subject when the evidence is so blatant.
I honestly think if all the 911 conspiracy debunkers were to hear Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi, Memebers of Mossad, ISI, Saud Secret Service all came out and admitted that they did indeed orchestrate 911 the debunkers would still not believe it.
Deny Ignorance?....
you mean
Ignorance denies
denying too long can even kill.
One of the more pervasive myths regarding “chemtrails” is that current presidential candidate Dennis Kuchinich tried to have them banned by an act of congress, but was pressured by the government to modify the act to remove the mention of “chemtrails”.
So what really happened? In a nutshell, Kucinich did not write the bill (or read it, until too late), the focus of the bill is nothing to do with chemtrails, it was written by UFO enthusiasts trying to:
1. Nullify a vast conspiracy by the “military-industrial complex”
2. Allow the use of suppressed alien technology for free energy
3. Avoid accidentally shooting down (or scaring away) visiting aliens.
They listed a bunch of weird weapons, including mind control, tectonic weapons and (very briefly) chemtrails. The bill was re-written several time in less unusual language to give it chance of passing, but ultimately fizzled in committee...
...So what’s Kucinich’s involvement in this? It’s difficult to say. Kucinich is anti-war, so perhaps that’s his motivation. He does have a lot of new-age, UFO-believing, friends, but he’s also running for president. When he was made aware of the nature of the “exotic weapons” language in the bill, it was re-written, and when questioned about it, he said
“I’m not into that. Understand me. When I found out that was in there, I said, ‘Look, I’m not interested in going there.’”
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by dragonridr
Don't forget that the town is smack bang in the middle of a widespread oil field and Barium a component in the drilling process.
I believe I've tried to point that fact out to Chembreather several times, I even went to the trouble of finding maps of the area showing all the wells.
But nope, ignorance reigns supreme.
[edit on 19/10/09 by Chadwickus]
Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
Common sense tells me
We all get better Radio and TV reception on Cloudy Days.
I read a Patent somewhere that such and such smaller than 50 micron
will run thru fuel filters in planes and improve military communications,
as an aircraft mechanic on here explained.
The question is there more to Chemtrails then that or are they even healthy?
In my mind…