Another Chemtrail Question

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by stars15k

 

I've already said they're not persistent contrails which follow the flight paths we're familiar with; I started this thread because most of these the conversations devolve into discussions of the same minutiae.

Well, you need to prove that. A compass and a camera would be all you need to use to prove this, and neither are particularly expensive these days. And did you consider how many more routes there would be that he didn't put in that video?

reply to post by apex


I feel like I'm repeating myself here.

Got an videos or photos? Before the GoM explosion, I could point a camera at the horizon at any given moment and see "persistent contrails" in my photos. Immediately after that no grid or parallel patters could be seen...from one day to the next, during times when in years past the sky would be heavily sprayed. It was like turning off the light.

If nothing has changed, you should be able to provide photographs or movies of the phenomenon...hell, they're all over the place after 2000. Show me that Nascar footage from the 80s.

reply to post by apex


I don't need to prove anything, please stop trying to derail my post with your straw men.

This post is requesting photographs and movies from the 20th century which display the same phenomenon we see today...grids and lines expanding to cover the sky with a haze.

I have already stated the spraying is not as heavy as it used to be, but if it begins in earnest as before, I will definitely take footage of spray-days to calculate the flight patterns and compare them to alleged flight paths. Perhaps someone in another state can do the same, but for now, please try to focus on footage and photos and save the distractions for the other threads.

reply to post by Yankee451


Wait, what??

Before the GoM explosion....

You attmept to attribute a causal relationship to something that has absolutely no relationship at all, to contrails? That is a localized, fallacious and biased observation.

Especially in view of the fact that we still have several members, other parts of the country, "complaining" about "trails"....when, in fact, they are jst, yet again, normal contrails.

reply to post by apex


Well ( nervous giggle.... ):

Second, wow, it really would stop a good amount of air traffic if Yellowstone erupted, wouldn't it?

Ummmm....IF Yellowstone (variously described as a "mega"-volcano) were to erupt in our modern times??

Airline traffic, and contrails (or lack of) will be the very LEAST of our worries....search for some scary videos on this, the prospects. OR, the ATS threads.....

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by apex

 

I don't need to prove anything, please stop trying to derail my post with your straw men.

Yes, you do need to prove this, because you outright stated here that they don't follow normal flight paths:

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by stars15k

 

I've already said they're not persistent contrails which follow the flight paths we're familiar with; I started this thread because most of these the conversations devolve into discussions of the same minutiae.

So, prove it. My apologies for derailing the thread slightly, but you can't state something as absolute fact without giving us some actual proof beyond your word.

--------------------

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Ummmm....IF Yellowstone (variously described as a "mega"-volcano) were to erupt in our modern times??
Airline traffic, and contrails (or lack of) will be the very LEAST of our worries....search for some scary videos on this, the prospects. OR, the ATS threads.....

Well, maybe I should have specified a small Yellowstone eruption. I know what a larger eruption would do....

Wow, has it realy been that long since I wrote those?

reply to post by weedwhacker


What? I can't notice a change in the sky that happened to coincide with the GoM explosion? Good grief, you're like a broken record with your distractions. Got anything on topic to add?

reply to post by Yankee451


Your tiny, narrow sliver of view, (in comparison to the broader, and overall breadth of the rest of the world) is, I presume, localized somewhere along the GoM, and has no relation at all, in causality.

This is specious reasoning. A fallacy.

Contrail development, and persistence, will vary seasonally, as a matter of rule. Due to seasonal variations in atmospheric conditions. BUT, there unlikely to be a correlation to the ocean in the Gulf, to the upper levels of the atmosphere seven or eight miles high above it!!

If anything, upper-level atmosphere can be influenced by conditions, even in the oceans, but at many miles away...the phenomenon called "El Nino/El Nina", in the Pacific Ocean, is an example. Those variable ocean surface temperatures can affect the atmosphere, but it isn't a carefully localized occurrence.....

reply to post by apex


Please re read my post, or just the last two sentences. If you have nothing to add about the topic please refrain from posting. Thanks.

reply to post by Yankee451


I`ve found a video that`s had a chemtrail added onto it.
Why would they do this ?

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Yankee451


OK, picture from 1974. right here. Contrail is in the sky above the plane, obviously. There might be another one, quite faint, just above (from the original perspective) the clouds.

We can be sure that it is from that sort of time, on account of it being a picture of a 707 owned by Pan Am, who went bankrupt sometime before the Chemtrail craze took off.

And some more

This one has one visible to the right of the vertical stabiliser. Again, dates back to the 1980s this time.

Could be just some high altitude Cirrus, not really sure.

To be fair, just put an airline that went under before 1995 into airliners.net, and you will find some if you look for long enough - these were found with Pan Am, London Heathrow.


And another one, several contrails visible in top right corner.

And yet another one. This one and the one above happen to be pictures of "Maid of the Seas", destroyed by a bomb over Lockerbie in 1988.

reply to post by apex


Thanks, but a lone persistent contrail isn't what I was looking for. Examples like these, only from the 80s would do it but I can't find any.

www.eugenecarsey.com...

reply to post by lambros56


Thanks, that's a nice find, albeit a little creepy. I've seen many examples of "persistent contrails" being included in mass media, especially in the last five years. It appears to be an attempt to desensitize the true believers. If you've got more examples like that, please lay them on me.

Thanks again.

reply to post by Yankee451


Well, some of them do have more than one. The trouble is, that as has been said before, changes in engine technology cause them to last longer, apparently.

The other thing is, that those pictures I posted clearly come from back then. A picture just of the sky has no such dating, it could be recent or 30 years ago, if it is a good scan.

reply to post by apex


I know this is a difficult task and that dates can be tricky which is why I though of sports events and concerts...it'd be easier to date an image of the Good Year Blimp at a football game for example.

Originally posted by lambros56
reply to post by Yankee451

 

I`ve found a video that`s had a chemtrail added onto it.

They also added a modern electric train, power lines, different internals for the train, different bodies....

Why would they do this ?

www.youtube.com...

Probably because they were making a commercial and wanted it to look like an odd mix of old an new...and there is no doubt there are a lot moer contrails now than there were way back when!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Fair enough, but why not include a wireless modem or one of the kids texting instead of a persistent contrail? A persistent contrail seems odd. Why draw attention to polluted skies? Does pollution indicate advancement? They could just as well have included the space shuttle.

Because a wireless modem would look silly in the sky, a space shuttle might not be a realistic background for a railroad set in a rolling green fields-ish countryside?

Honestly - you have to ask them - I can only make guesses - there are millions of things they could have included - but a contrail is not particularly ouot of place, so why do you think it is suspicious?

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

One of the captions in your link states:

"A cold morning in Kensington Gardens (resulting in a sky full of contrails), London, England"

This sounds about right. It is because I always associated colder crisper days with contrails that I started wondering why they suddenly began blocking the sun on hot cloudless days.

When I was an apprentice (1970's) we were taught that, as a rule of thumb, the air temperature decreases by 2 degrees C with evey 1000 feet of altitude. Now obviously that's not going to give you accurate temperatures, but it will put you in hte ball park.

so if it is 30 deg C at ground level then you would expect it to be -40 deg C at 35,000 feet.

It should be no great surprise that you now see contrails in places and times you never used to - airliners and especially private jets fly higher and higher (they are more efficient at high altitudes) driven by bigger engines delivering better efficiencies, and roughly 10 times as many jets in 2003 as 1965, flying perhaps 15 times as many flights and hours - the following graphic is from a 2004 Boeing document I cleaned out a few weeks ago & sent to Contrail Science:




did you check this page for photos of multiple contrails?? contrailscience.com...

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Sorry no, I missed those shots earlier. They seem to show what I was describing, thank you.

I now see how this topic can devolve into minutiae, and I also see how it would be a perfect cover for a covert weather modification program. Very vexing, but thank you for your post, have a star.

This link to Flight International Archives may be of some interest - it is a search result in their archives for "Vapour trail" from 1925-1945.

The couple of photos on it are already well known I think, but of interest to me was the accounts and speculation as to the nature of vapour trails (what we now call contrails) going on in the early 1940's.

Here's another link, specifically to the September 1940 issue, which contains an article "Visible vortices" - this article notes long lasting - persistant - contrails, contrails from eth entire width of the wing, and short-term contrails.

I know these are not the photos you want, and perhaps comprise the minutae you didn't want to get into....but for me they are absolutely fascinating as part of the history of flight