Another Chemtrail Question

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul



Much obliged for your input and appreciate the perspective.

TO THE ABOVE DEBUNKERS:

Why then do some contrails evaporate right behind the plane as it crosses the sky, never to be seen again, while others hang and stretch and billow and blow in the wind and leave lasting visible effects for the rest of the day? we aren't in a constant foggy haze from all the cars driving around leaving persistent contrails, and half of the jets in the sky seem to leave no trail across the sky.

reply to post by RicoMarston

Why then do some contrails evaporate right behind the plane as it crosses the sky, never to be seen again, while others hang and stretch and billow and blow in the wind and leave lasting visible effects for the rest of the day?

You mentioned cars...that is part of the answer. The condensation that the car's exhaust makes isn't nearly as great in quantity, for one thing. Second, unless you are at one of the poles, it just isn't COLD enough for the condensation in car's exhaust to freeze into ice crystals, as contrails do, from jet engine exhaust.

When a contrail evaporates (sublimates, technically) fairly quickly after passage, it's because the Relative Humidity at that altitude, and location, isn't sufficient to sustain the contrail, after it forms. Think of it as right on the edge of "no contrails" and "persistent contrails". Temperature plays a role, too.

The thing about "lasting effects" is....once formed, and WHEN conditions are ripe for other clouds (cirrus, at those altitudes) to ALSO form....that is what happens. Clouds. Clouds form for many, many perfectly natural reasons....you don't deny that clouds can hang around for many hours, and cover the sky, do you??

Contrails behave no differently than clouds, in that situation. Clouds, also, will sometimes evaporate (sublimate) too, right??

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by lambros56

 

.... It appears to be an attempt to desensitize the true believers. If you've got more examples like that, please lay them on me.

Wait....if life in the media, and life outside.... are equal, what is there to desensetize ?
In other words, if you see contrails outside, then see them on TV.....how is that strange ?

It would only be strange if you did not see them outside, but then saw them on TV.
...or vice-versa.

I think this is the making of an issue, where there is no issue to be had.

..and regarding your need to find videos of contrails during the 60's thru 80's....good luck. It may be difficult.
That's not a cop-out....it's just a fact that such technology was not easy to come-by back then.
Now days, nearly everyone has video-phone capability......not-so back then.
Add to that, the contrast was much more intense back 30/40 years ago.
I looked at my family albums for clear pics of skies....I mostly got "white" skies, because the film (and exposure) in the Instamatic cameras was geared more toward capturing people's faces, than properly exposed skies.

Just for grits and shiggles, I googled "ansel adams contrails". Because he's a reknowned photographer, with many examples of skies in his works. Though, might have thought contrails spoiled his pictures of nature....Got some, many aren't his work. This one is labeled from 1954, though:

Originally posted by RicoMarston
TO THE ABOVE DEBUNKERS:

Why then do some contrails evaporate right behind the plane as it crosses the sky, never to be seen again, while others hang and stretch and billow and blow in the wind and leave lasting visible effects for the rest of the day? we aren't in a constant foggy haze from all the cars driving around leaving persistent contrails, and half of the jets in the sky seem to leave no trail across the sky.

Because conditions across the sky are not all exactly the same - so in some parts of the sky, or at some altitudes, there are the conditions for contrails to stay, and in others there are not.

Your comment is a pretty standard question - as is my reply - it's atmospheric science - go look it up.

The question of atmospheric effects is valid. The observation of differences in contrail behavior, coupled with public statements indicating the military's desire to control the weather are what makes people suspect a covert program for weather manipulation. It is a valid suspicion.

It should be noted that if there is a covert weather modification plan it would be sensible to have "persistent contrails" be the cover story, resulting in distracting arguments such as we're involved in now.

I noticed a big difference in contrail behavior from about 2007 until the GoM explosion (massive grid patterns and parallel lines causing a sun-blocking haze). After the GoM, it all changed back to normal. The atmospheric conditions hadn't changed from one day to the next, but the behavior of contrails sure did.

I have yet to see any photos or video from the 20th century that show contrails spreading out to create a haze, yet they are plentiful in the 21st century. Thanks to the folks who have posted photos from the last century, but those are photos of persistent contrails and they don't look the same as the systematic spraying I have witnessed.

Unfortunately I cannot provide photographic evidence which shows the difference I described in my sky, and I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything...this post was for my benefit, but I'm still not satisfied.

The change in my area was DRAMATIC. Huge patterns of grids, covering the sky in all directions, and after a couple years like that, it all stopped. Atmospheric conditions can explain occasional persistent contrails, but they don't explain how they would change so dramatically from one day to the next. The reason I noticed them to begin with was because they blocked the sun on sunny days. If the grids and lines are normal, I should be able to count on seeing them at about the same time each year. For a couple years in a row I noticed the sun being blocked on most sunny days...this is what caught my attention to begin with, and this is what caught my attention when they STOPPED; the sunny days are back and persistent contrails are only visible occasionally again.

Here's an article describing it over Cyprus:

“We challenge the authorities to prove us wrong. The president of the chemists in Greece recently suggested to the Cyprus parliament that the easiest and most effective way to test for chemtrails would be to send a plane up in the skies above Cyprus, with air filters, which could collect samples of air. These could then be analysed.” He said it would only cost around ten thousand euros. “This would solve the mystery,” he added.

www.cyprus-mail.com...

Why would anyone in the chemtrail camp believe the Govt if it did such sampling?

why don'' they do it, and prove themselves right??

It is quite irritating really!

for a video of 20th century contrails spreading out over the entire sky look up some of the WW2 ones of B-17's - here's one in youtube from the film on het Memphis Belle - the whole original film is referenced.

Here's a page devoted to giving examples of persistant and spreading contrails - with newspaper clippings about them back to 1944 and a first hand account from 1940

this page includes a couple of phots and videos from WW2 that clearly show contrails expanding.

Hope that helps.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


You're right, I would expect a transparent investigation by a governing body that was genuinely interested in the welfare of its people.

None of the videos I've seen can explain the grid patterns I've seen blocking the sun, day after day, week after week, month after month. Nor do they explain how those sun-blocking hazes are no longer here. If grids and lines are so common as to block most of the summer sun for a couple of years straight, they should have also been there this last summer.

Why do you assume that the conditions in the upper atmosphere are always identical from summer to summer?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I assume the atmospheric conditions to be chaotic. Since this summer, the conditions have been as I recall them being prior to the summer of 2007, which was when the grids and patterns were so dramatically blocking the sun. This went on daily, at least on the days I could see the sky (it is Oregon, after all)...the haze could be counted on whether it was a sunny day in April, or a hot day in August. Then one day the grids stopped, and so did the haze...and now we're back to the familiar old, run of the mill, occasional perpetual contrail, as one would expect to see in a chaotic system.

reply to post by Yankee451


WAIT a gol-gosh darned minute!! (Using my best James Stewart voice, from any of his many movies....)...

You live in OREGON, and are trying to equate any of your (mistaken perceptions) to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill????

Oh, sheesh!

What a waste of time, sorry.....(and utterly illogical....).

reply to post by weedwhacker


What have you convinced yourself of now, Weedwacker?

It seems quite logical to suspect a correlation when one notices a large spraying operation in the GoM coinciding with an observed dramatic drop in local air traffic accompanied by long-lost clear skies, although I'm guessing you'd prefer I just take your word for it and spend my time examining my navel.

Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

I assume the atmospheric conditions to be chaotic.

conditions change - if there are only occasional contrails now then that's because of the conditions now. If there were persistant contrails "then" then it is because the conditions were right for them "then".

There are essentially an infinite number of reasons why it would be different "now" then "then", so I dont' actualy know what your point is.

your observations are anecdotal - I don't see you saying that you have done a survey of contrail "numbers" or kept tabs on atmospheric conditions, so I cannot see that you have anything to base any suspicions on except what we always hear - unsupported assertions and speculation.

And that's both boring and unconvincing.

At least science has evidence you can check - and if you choose to be unconvinced by it then that is you choosing to ignore verifiable evidence.

reply to post by Yankee451


I am going to have to open this one up, to let some one else field it....how many new ways can I write how utterly illogical it is???

Someone in Oregon, with nothing other than a very limited memory of what is "remembered"....suddenly makes this crap up in his/her mind, citing a false analogy with an event thousnads of miles away???\

This is the epitome of fallacious reasoning....it's what once held science back for centuries, and still does, even to this day...obviously....

I would, but I'm not sure what he's saying.

there's less air traffic up that way? How does he know that?

Some time there was more contrails than others - OK......i'm wondering if there's a question in there anywhere??

Of course aircraft in 2008 flew about twice as many hours as in 1989 (Boeing document I have, dunno if it is online anywhere) - so..er...maybe that's why there are more contrails now than then??

What is his question??

reply to post by weedwhacker


Then please don't debase yourself by hanging around.

How to tell a contrail from a chemtrail.
Chemtrails 101.
If the product (cloud) gradually expands, and continues to expand for hours until it is a milky haze, you have yourself a chemtrail.
If you live in a very rural area, but your skies look like an airshow has taken place, you have chemtrails.
If you are experiencing dry weather, and the skies are clear, but soon you notice the now familiar crisscross of the "clouds" gradually expanding and creating the haze, then you NOW know chemtrails.

If you see this persistently, put out your little dish of water, have it tested.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


"He" knows by virtue of the details included in "his" original post.

"He" couldn't care less if you don't accept "his" explanation of how "he knows".

Thanks for your photos and input, but you can keep your condescension.