More photos of chemtrails in Vancouver Canada / Responce from aviation investigator

the article says that the blanket allows heat to come in better than it allows it to leave. that video you posted was not intended to show cloud cover over the earth and isolated days with relatively clear skies. maybe its cause i live on the coast but i can count the number of days we get clear skies with just my fingers... no thumbs or toes. AND it seems any day that it does look like we are going to get some deep blue skies... boom jets fly over and cover the sky with a wisk of cloud like it did in the pictures i posted.

I'm not complaining, my skin cannot take the direct sun anymore. never in my life has my forearm been burned by the sun, that is until the last two summers. that sun is getting hot and if we are not doing anything to protect people on the surface from rise in sunspots that we are seeing lately then i have to ask what is the use of science anyway?

Do you believe the surface of the earth is going to hold up just fine against this round of sun spots? even knowing that our ice caps cannot make it much longer if temperatures maintain let alone increase? What is going to be done about global warming and when?

Oh my bad... i forgot, we already got cap and trade, i guess we are safe now. off to the ballot box now to make a difference.

Sunburn does not have to do with temperature, its the amount of sunlight you are getting. You can get a bad sunburn in the winter in really cold temps or on a mountain top.

No, the amount of sunlight is not changing by anything big, there are so many groups, agencies and colleges that study that.

Originally posted by firepilot
Sunburn does not have to do with temperature, its the amount of sunlight you are getting. You can get a bad sunburn in the winter in really cold temps or on a mountain top.

No, the amount of sunlight is not changing by anything big, there are so many groups, agencies and colleges that study that.

dude... i'm 30 not 13 i think i know that. wait a minute, how old are you? i have been in the same 100 km radius for over 10 years now, im pretty sure i would know if i was on a mountain. i said the sun was getting hot

Originally posted by tom goose

Originally posted by firepilot
Sunburn does not have to do with temperature, its the amount of sunlight you are getting. You can get a bad sunburn in the winter in really cold temps or on a mountain top.

No, the amount of sunlight is not changing by anything big, there are so many groups, agencies and colleges that study that.

dude... i'm 30 not 13 i think i know that. wait a minute, how old are you? i have been in the same 100 km radius for over 10 years now, im pretty sure i would know if i was on a mountain. i said the sun was getting hot

Well, you have to understand the average level of science knowledge the average chemtrail believer brings, which is quite minimal.

Do you you think the sunlight just in your area is different? Do you have any links for any websites that monitor the amount of sunlight or UV radiation? Some chemtrailers make the opposite claim of you, that we have less sunlight now

Originally posted by tom goose

Originally posted by firepilot
Sunburn does not have to do with temperature, its the amount of sunlight you are getting. You can get a bad sunburn in the winter in really cold temps or on a mountain top.

No, the amount of sunlight is not changing by anything big, there are so many groups, agencies and colleges that study that.

dude... i'm 30 not 13 i think i know that. wait a minute, how old are you? i have been in the same 100 km radius for over 10 years now, im pretty sure i would know if i was on a mountain. i said the sun was getting hot

Well, you have to understand the average level of science knowledge the average chemtrail believer brings, which is quite minimal.

Do you you think the sunlight just in your area is different? Do you have any links for any websites that monitor the amount of sunlight or UV radiation? Some chemtrailers make the opposite claim of you, that we have less sunlight now

The Maunder Minimum

Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to 1715 (38 kb JPEG image). Although the observations were not as extensive as in later years, the Sun was in fact well observed during this time and this lack of sunspots is well documented. This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had similar periods of inactivity in the more distant past. The connection between solar activity and terrestrial climate is an area of on-going research.

solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...

I think it might be happening to the planet. We have record that a solar cycle linked to causing a little ice age is now entering it's maximum. We have no record of the last solar maximum so your guess is as good as mine.

What would be your guess as to what type of reverse effects we might see at the opposite end of a cycle that caused a little ice age?

I don't think that there would be sinister plan to destroy the food supply by cutting out the sun in order to thin the population. I have heard that claim before. I would see some logic though in the idea that there may be a campaign to try and repel the effects of excessive radiation during a period of unrecorded radiation exposure. To fuel a conspiracy theory that focus on diabolical plans from your own government to thin the population by spraying the food supply and blot out the sun would cause more heads to shake than roll.

How is any method of defense supposed to make it through public inquiries, appeals, test cases... We don't have time for that crap, someone (some people) need to think of something fast and darn well do it. I don't need to know... but i sure am curious

Originally posted by tom goose
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

This is from Wiki:

Vapour trails or contrails, by affecting the Earth's radiation balance, act as a radiative forcing. Studies have found that vapour trails or contrails trap outgoing longwave radiation emitted by the Earth and atmosphere (positive radiative forcing) at a greater rate than they reflect incoming solar radiation (negative radiative forcing). Therefore, the overall net effect of contrails is positive, i.e. a warming.[5] However, the effect varies daily and annually, and overall the magnitude of the forcing is not well known: globally (for 1992 air traffic conditions), values range from 3.5 mW/m² to 17 mW/m². Other studies have determined that night flights are mostly responsible for the warming effect: while accounting for only 25% of daily air traffic, they contribute 60 to 80% of contrail radiative forcing. Similarly, winter flights account for only 22% of annual air traffic, but contribute half of the annual mean radiative forcing.[6]

This is what i was talking about with the contrails trapping heat underneath the contrail far better than it is at bouncing heat from above back up. I know you guys are saying that there is no need to modify contrails because regular air vapor already does that. This article tells me they dont do it very well. Snow wont work because we seem to be running out of permanent ice to take care of it.

Why airplanes? too expensive! not practical compared to rockets!

But....

If we actually were in dire straits wouldn't airline traffic be the perfect cover? We know that the idea is brought to the table wit geoengineers, but we can only assume that the need for this cover is so dear that informing the public would be dangerous and could crash global markets more than they have been already in the last couple of years. Are people not going to be asking question when there are rockets being launched ever 1000 km2 twice a day? don't you think folks might start getting worried?

I'm might not be looking at this logically from geophysicist point of view, but maybe from a point of view of those that have more control over our daily lives than we would like to believe? You can tell me to get my tin foil hat all you want but i need only ask myself "what would i do if was running sh%t and wanted to continue without anything rocking my boat"

I thank you people very much for this discussion and I'm glad nobody here is trying to link cloud seeding with contrails with chemtrails.

PS. the chemtrail conspiracy would be a good cover to make sure that anyone that ask too many of the right question could easily be lable as a crack pot who thinks the government is out to kill them. I would have done that one too. slick

Well thats odd... what do they do if there is no cumulous clouds...sol lol. I imagine weather modification as far as producing rain would be most beneficial in arid places...

Well there has to already be something that would create a rain storm, in order for their to be seeding for rain. It does require convection and cumulonimbus, you are correct about that. And on days with no storms, there is no seeding. It has been tried in some arid areas, but a problem can be that there is so much dust and other aerosol particles in the air, it can really effect being able to seed a storm.

NCAR in Boulder Colorado has had weather research projects in Mali, India, Saudi Arabia, UAE and other places, studying this exact theory.